Would proving that Kerry actually won the election change '06Dem strategy

[Nikki Stone 1]

The Democratic party is making some changes based on "family values", which they assume is the reason that Bush won in 2004. The national party has chosen not to dwell on all the voting irregularities, but there is a lot of evidence out there that, in fact, Bush lost. Would it change the strategy for next year if the national Democratic party acknowledged that Greg Palast (and others) are right and the Kerry actually won?

[hippiepunk]

1. Well first the dems might

not concede the "values" debate

[autorank]

2. If it were generally accepted, with a smoking gun, ...

If we've got convincing evidence that is generally accepted, then I suggest we have the same attitude as this guy. We should go out and demand that we win every contested election because we would be saying that ...

THE REPUBLICANS ARE THE PARTY OF ELECTION FRAUD. THEY MUST BE PUNISHED.

[FreedomAngel82]

12. I agree

If there is valid proof and not just "theories" we should be screaming it. That the only way the republicans can win is if they cheat, steal, lie and manipulate. I thought though if there was real valid proof that someone stole an election it was very much a crime? What could happen with that?

[autorank]

17. There are both Federal and State laws against this.

I'm sure there's a lot of time to do in fairly unpleasant places for anyone convicted of this. As for the fraud, the work of TruthIsAll here and Steve Freedman plus the other academics really shows that it was stolen. Unfortunetaly, the same statistical rules and techniques used to make ALL of our science and technology work WILL NOT be accepted with regard to the the election. Heck, we can't even get a story on these findings. If we can prove that someone(s) tampered with results or machines to generate results, we can rock and rock hard on this for decades!

[napi21]

3. We haven't been able to prove Shrub actually lost.

If we can't do that, we've got to let it go.

I've been thinking about this voting machine "irregularities" issue, and I think our best argument is:

"there is no proof the machines were compromised, but ther's also no proof that they weren't. There is a long accepted principle that perception is what is REAL. We need, for the good of both Parties, to insure via a valid audit trail, that our elections are accurate! If a Dem wins next time, the Pubs will believe the same as we do now. That's wrong for America. We have fpight for free and honest elections in many other countries, and we need to convince the American people that we have then in America as well!"

[Generic Guy]

11. What do you mean there is no proof?

I have read article after article how the chances of the exit polling being so different than the "results" is one in almost a million. Laura Flanders was talking about that today even. The proof is there the media has just ignored it. bush stole this election and I hope in 06 we can get enough numbers so that they can not get away with cheating and we take back the house and senate. Then impeach the murdering bastard.

[librechik]

26. tons of evidence--no place to present it

apparently--the only place--The House--certified the Shrub. The only place we can impeach--The House--is dominated by partisan Pukkkes.

yep, 2006 House turnover is our only hope--such as it is.

Welcome to DU, GG!

:hi:

[Griffy]

30. so.. no proof.. and bush gets your benefit of the doubt?!

I dont get it.. the peole that will admit fraud happens, they dont know how much, but somehow the media has them convinced that bush got more votes. Just ask yourself do you think black holes are real?... because we got more evidence of fraud than a black hole.. but in both cases we cant show hold it in our hands, but all roads lead to the same conclusion. Add to that a pattern of now 3 elections with highly suspect numbers... now top all that off with the lies and propaganda methods bush uses and it becomes more likely he cheated than won fairly.

[BillZBubb]

4. Of course it would.

Proof, solid irrefutable, proof that Kerry won would be proof the Repugs subverted democracy and committed treason. Even the sheeple would not stand for that.

[BrklynLiberal]

5. That is what I would hope. If the public saw that the election was stolen

it might awake them from their stupor...and there might actually be some outrage and indignation at what was going on.
Hopefully this would be channeled into throwing all the Repukes connected with the White House out of Congress and a total repudiation of anyone else who supported them.

EDIT:We sent American soldiers over to Afghanistan and Iraq to die to bring Democracy over THERE and they stole the election HERE?!
Where is the outrage??? Maybe that would also open up the possiblities to them that there were so many other lies that were told by W and his cronies...you know, the first chink in the armor, the first hole ini the "TEFLON". The truth would be shown that their "idol" is NOT so perfect.

[FreedomAngel82]

13. Would they believe it though?

I do believe they stole it. Why? The reps had this election reform group that was sought out not long ago and it was discovered they were all frauds and stuff. They must be worried.

[librechik]

27. we see what happens when it's generally believed--ZERO

even tho a majority think it might have happened, and millions are convinced it did.

Nothing Happens.

All it takes is a few people in the media to declare it so --or not so--and history gets erased or rewritten, before your eyes. And self-censored after that.

[WI_DEM]

6. I doubt that is the answer

Gore won the 2000 election with more convincing evidence than Kerry won 2004--Gore actually won the popular vote. Yet the Democratic leadership in the HOuse and Senate thought that it was best to move to the right and not challenge Bush--especially on Iraq.

[BrklynLiberal]

7. Bush was rescued by 9/11 from the truth that was about to be published

that very day.... If that had not happened, he would have gone down like a stone, maybe even been impeached.

[tinrobot]

9. Exactly what was about to be published?

I'm not aware of this....

[FreedomAngel82]

14. Supposivley on September 12th, 2001

it was supposed to be announced that Gore really won Florida and thus the election of 2000. Of course we all know what happened with that...

[eaglenetsupport]

10. I'll bite what is it that got quashed on 9/11

[BrklynLiberal]

18. Here is an article from the Telegraph in UK from Oct 2001

http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?sSheet=/news/2001/10/21/ixhomer.html/&xml=/news/2001/10/21/wgore21.xml
Did Al Gore win after all? US newspapers would rather not say
By Charles Laurence in New York
(Filed: 21/10/2001)

THE most detailed analysis yet of the contested Florida votes from last year's presidential election - with the potential to question President Bush's legitimacy - is being withheld by the news organisations that commissioned it.

Results of the inspection of more than 170,000 votes rejected as unreadable in the "hanging chad" chaos of last November's vote count were ready at the end of August.

The study was commissioned early this year by a consortium including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and the New York Times, the nation's most powerful newspapers, and the broadcaster CNN.

It was regarded as a means of supplying final answers to the nagging questions over President Bush's razor-thin victory margin. The cost was more than £700,000.

Now, however, spokesmen for the consortium say that they decided to "postpone" the story of the analysis by the National Opinion Research Centre (NORC) at the University of Chicago for lack of resources and lack of interest in the face of the enormous story of the September 11 attacks and the subsequent "war on terrorism".

Newspapers were saying last week that the final phase of the analysis, the actual counting of the 170,000 votes, had been "postponed" but would become known at an appropriate time.
<snip>
However David Podvin, an investigative journalist who runs an independent web page, Make Them Accountable, said he had been tipped off that the consortium was covering up the results.

He refused to disclose his source other than to describe him as a former media executive whom he knew "as an accurate conduit of information" and who claimed that the consortium "is deliberately hiding the results of its recount because Gore was the indisputable winner".

He also claims that a New York Times journalist who was involved in the recount project had told "a former companion" that the Gore victory margin was big enough to create "major trouble for the Bush presidency if this ever gets out".

He believes that the inspection, carried out over months by a team from NORC, proves that Mr Gore won Florida and, therefore, the election.

That theory, however, is countered by the NORC staff who say that they designed the inspection programme so that no one has yet counted the votes and no outcome could be known.

Dr John Mason, a professor of political science at William Paterson University, in New Jersey said: "The goosiness, the sensitivity, that the press which organised this analysis is showing to publishing the results and the persistence of questions about the Florida ballots raise questions. There is a sensitivity over the legitimacy of this president."

Staff at NORC have been puzzled by the idea that the media would lack the resources because, according to them, they have computer programs already designed and fitted for the final count.

Julie Antelman of NORC said: "They are all ready to go, and could have the count and the result within a working week."

She added: "We very carefully kept our distance from the political implications of whatever the result may be. We do not know the outcome, and do not want to.

"Our job was to prepare the raw data which goes into the counting programs: we are simply waiting for the order to deliver this data to the consortium, which we expected within the first two weeks of September."
<snip>
French and Canadian newspapers suggest that the black-out can only raise suspicions, and the issue is being increasingly aired on the internet.

Dr Mason said: "It would be responsible to complete this study and produce the result, whatever it may be."

[eaglenetsupport]

8. We'll never get to the point of, a majority of Americans

understanding that the election was stolen until we get a proper investigation that produces that proof. That evidence is there, the conspiracy is too vast to hide all the evidence. It's just not possible to steal 8 million votes without a trace. Too much time has past and they have had enough time to get rid of most of the physical evidence, but not all. It's the witnesses placed in the position of immunity or serious jail time that will sink this ship. There are hundreds and possibly thousands of witness participants.

With the exception of Cliff A. in Ohio, (and their effort isn't there yet), NO investigation has gotten underway. I'm hoping bradblogs info they are developing to be released in the next three weeks (heard him touting it on AAR as the biggest bomb on this administration) or so is concerning election fraud. We need a break through on this one. We are at a tipping point. The whole deck of cards is going to come crashing down once it starts. Impeachment is no longer possible but now is likely I'm happy to report.

[FreedomAngel82]

15. I didn't hear about this

What's this info on BradBlog? Do you think this has anything to do with the rightwing election group that popped up not long ago?

[eaglenetsupport]

16. It wasn't about the fake voters rights

group, which is what he was on about on the seg I heard. The host, I think it was Randi, asked him that directly and he said no this was new information and new subject, but wouldn't divulge anything further.

[marions ghost]

20. I hope you're right..

--I think it's very possible that the public will one day come to know the truth--that the elections have been stolen. And they will be very angry when they finally do wake up. One of the best articles I've read that describes how recent election theft is different now but is not yet apparent to many Americans:

The Miami Herald Feb 03, 2005
ELECTIONS
Ukraine vote yields important lessons for U.S. democracy
BY LANCE DEHAVEN-SMITH

(excerpt)
"...election shenanigans were common in the 19th Century and in much of the 20th, but in recent years they have been eclipsed by scattered mischief that is carried out or abetted by public officials responsible for election administration. One factor that has contributed to this shift from the conspiratorial tampering of the past to the massive fraud that is so prevalent today is the poorly conceived effort to remake government in the image of the private sector. In recent years, civil-service protections for government employees have been greatly weakened, and many governmental functions have been contracted out to private corporations.

These changes in American public administration have created a new spoils system that makes massive fraud likely in today's elections because it effectively ties public employment and government contracts to election outcomes. In Florida and Ohio, for example, many corporations, public officials and government workers had a vested interest in the reelection of President Bush. No conspiracy was needed to orchestrate their activities. Multiple biases with cumulative effects could be (and were) introduced into the election system through the independent efforts of numerous individuals acting on their own initiative in the pursuit of the same objective. Until U.S. election laws are reformed to guard against massive fraud, our elections will remain vulnerable to systemic abuses.

To be sure, bias in election administration could probably be prosecuted today under existing laws. Certainly, officials in Florida and Ohio appear to have violated their official oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the constitutions of their states. They may have also broken federal civil-rights laws by intentionally weakening the voting power of African Americans. However, these acts of massive fraud have gone unpunished -- and, indeed, uninvestigated -- because most Americans have yet to recognize the new form of election tampering that is undermining our democracy."
Lance deHaven-Smith is professor of public administration and policy at Florida State University.

[seabeyond]

19. if it was stolen, and i believe it was

and there is proof. if you accumulate all the information, there are abosulte incidences of votes not counted accurately, denied, ect.......this is fact. already proven

then yes it makes a difference. they will steal again in 06 and 08 and 10

if the votes dont count then why run?

[Capn Sunshine]

21. The lesson lost on all of this

The way things seem to be structured in the election theft game, it only works if the election IS CLOSE ENOUGH TO STEAL.

If we learn anything, it should be to present a focused, unmuddled message that makes our position very clear.

We still haven't tried THAT in three cycles now.

[MissWaverly]

25. I disagree

I live in Maryland, and the votes were seriously bogus, yet the democrats control both Baltimore City and the State House, so HOW did it happen, I know that the machine I voted on defaulted 5 times for Bush, this is one of the first generation touchscreen which looks just like the old manual machines, so I did not press the wrong menu. The Democrats outnumber the Republicans who voted in Maryland by a 2 to 1 margin, yet Kerry carried Maryland by only a margin of 309,790 votes. Now there is talk that all the election results in Maryland are bogus, we may get a refund from Diebold. Plus they left the Democratic candidate for senator off the ballot in 3 counties, but no matter how bad the machines run, we kowtow and say okay. So what I am saying is that there is no magic number that we can achieve to overcome this trickery.

[bklyncowgirl]

22. They gotta do both.

The election shouldn't have been close enough to steal.

I'm one of those people who think that a strong populist platform is the way to go--that and a willingness to stand up for core beliefs.

They also have to address the election fraud problem in a direct and no nonsence way. Anyone who is against the ability to audit election results is someone who is planning to steal elections and the Democrats need to say that. They also need to clean up their own act.

[Nikki Stone 1]

23. The proof is statistical? Most Americans won't get it then

They won't be happy unless there is a video of a Repub operative tampering with the machines.

It has been the most frustrating thing to watch two elections that were so questionable be accepted by most Americans.

[ldf]

24. the american people would be interested

if they could ever get a good "big picture" explanation of what happened. the lap dog media, however, has no intention of letting that happen.

but the ruling democratic elite don't give a damn.

if it is true, it would just show what whores they have been, and they SURE don't want anything like that to come out.

they have proven that when the going gets tough, they will NOT get going. instead they will pander, make excuses, try to divert attention, ignore reality hoping it will go away, and RUSH EVEN FURTHER TO THE "MIDDLE".

they are becoming the democratic wing of the republican party.

we need new (elected) blood, from bottom to top.

[Nikki Stone 1]

28. Is anyone on Air America covering this well?

??

[Griffy]

32. ABSOLUTLY... they all except Franken have said it was rigged!

Randi mentions it often, and she has been on this since before 2000 when she was in FL. Malloy knows what these criminals did... Its the MSM still holding the masses in a political coma. And Franken is close to politicains, so I think he knows to stay of this hot button... but I doubt he thinks it was fair in OH at least! I know this.. there are millions of Americans that believe like I do.. it was rigged.. and they have no proof to quiet us... and no one that knows goes back.. so our numbers keep growing... AAR hits new markets every week! and like it took time for Americans to accept nixon was a crook.. so too will the criminal actions of bush take time to sink in!

[dsc]

29. I have seen nothing that suggests Kerry won the popular vote

so I fail to see why, even if he technically would have won via Ohio, we shouldn't look at why he didn't get a majority of the votes. I disagree with the reasons being given as to why but we had better find out why.

[Griffy]

31. The key is "you've seen nothing".. its there but ask yourself..

why do you believe bush would suddenly play fair and balanced! We got the majority of votes. you are still in denail of the level of crimial activity bush is involved in. And you want the people to prove to you the crook in office is cheating?!

[seabeyond]

33. my state texas and next door new mexico

vote a straight dem ticket and it would give the pres vote to bush and the rest to dems. if you didnt check it in preview, that vote was registered to bush. even when it was previewed it would take three four five times trying to clear it before getting the vote to kerry. these were heavily democratic areas in texas. houston, austin el paso. many people reported they gave up and the vote went to bush

they knew the first day of two week early vote. they didnt correct it. on election day, they still hadnt corrected it.

1 in 3
1 in 4

what was the ratio of votes that went to bush

this happened across the country in different manners. but this is fact. it isnt a theory

[MissWaverly]

36. the same 5 tries

I believe these machines were all rigged
end result
democratic vote erased
5 votes for Bush (the 5 tries before machine selected Kerry not Bush)
any problems on election day, innocent dem caught election tampering
vote count does not equal count on poll books =
Blame liberal and dems for not having voter ID system, letting sleazy
felons vote, illegal immigrants, people voting twice, etc.
Blame everybody
Steal election

PS I pressed the button next to Kerry 5 times, Bush lit up every time
in Baltimore MD

[dsc]

37. That can't have happened in New Mexico

as that state was too close. Had Kerry lost that many votes to theft then the state would have been called for Bush minutes after it closed. Instead it was still too close to call for a couple of days.

[Porcupine]

34. The official '06 Dem strategy is to lose and screw us again

which is why any Democratic elected official who challenges GOP vote fraud is fed to the dogs. After all our primaries are counted on their machines.

I believe in democrats. I have no faith in a Democratic Party that includes Joe Leiberman.

[GetTheRightVote]

35. The Republicans stole it again & do not want an investigation

this does not mean that * won, in fact he lost, but they will hold off the truth as long as they can, but the truth has a funny way of coming out anyway after some time has passed.

:kick:

[fujiyama]

38. I think it's apparent

that there were many problems with the Ohio vote. Likewise there problems I remember hearing in NV, NM, and several other states. I'm not all that sure that there was enough to make a difference in the popular vote though.

I base this mainly on senate voting - I really don't think all those southern states we lost were rigged or stolen. I think they were lost because of cultural wedge issues. We're facing difficulty in many states and while potential fraud is an extremely serious issue, if we ignore everything else but scream "FRAUD!", we won't get any where.

That said, I'm not interested in Dems going puke light and the DLC strategy sure hasn't been working.