What Howard Dean said about fraud...

[Laura PourMeADrink]

From 1/1, in case you missed. Copied the relevant part of the interview:

http://peopleforchange.net/commentaries/hdinterview

Q: OK, I’ll get right to it, then. Many in the party were extremely disheartened to see voting irregularities worsen instead of improve in this past cycle, and in light of the stories we’ve seen coming out of Ohio and Florida, what do you think Democrats can do to restore faith in the system? Do you feel that you can take the lead in this issue? It was certainly the number one topic at the last group of meetings that DFA had.

HD: I think we need to focus on election officials. County Clerks, Secretaries of State in particular, because the Republicans have been so partisan in exercising their responsibility to help people vote, they‘ve in fact tried to suppress turnout instead of encourage it. Secondly, we, I think we need to try to get laws passed, by referendum if necessary, that says that no voting machines in a particular state or jurisdiction may be used unless they can be recounted by hand. Oregon has such a statute because Bill Bradbury (Oregon’s Secretary of State) got one passed in 2001. We should try to state by state overhaul the election process both by referendum and by electing where possible Democratic Secretaries of State and County Clerks.

Q: In other words, just seizing the thing locally is the way to go….

HD. Well, obviously, we’re not going to get rid of the Bush Administration for the next four years and this Congress wants to suppress votes instead of increase them. So I think the local venue is the best thing we can do.

Q: Do you think it’s too much to hope for that we’ll get any kind of media coverage regarding the Bush Administration’s active plan of disenfranchisement through basically ill equipping the polls, all those shenanigans that were pulled, do you think…

A Well, in order to do that you have to have some proof that that actually happened and while I think suspicion are well justified, we don’t actually have proof that there was a plan to do that, and until we have some proof, it’s not likely that we’re going to get much media coverage. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence and I think we are getting some media coverage on the circumstantial evidence, for example the over vote, Cuyahoga County, The addition of 3500 votes that didn’t exist before the balloting even started, on some of those electronic touch screen voting machines, those things we have to be concerned about, and I think we can get press on them.

[cheezus]

1. yep, it's all local

the good news is that one person CAN (rather easily!) make a difference, locally

[empathy]

3. smart man

My brother was involve din Dean's primary campaign. I was a bit off in the distance but really, has anyone hear this man ever say anything stupid? He is motivated, intelligent, and well-spoken.

Maybe he is too far to the left for some moderates, but Bush has proven you can win while being what many consider extreme. I would support this man for President in a heartbeat.

Convictions, honesty... he is like John McCain turned to the good side of the force (plus without McCain's occasional lapses into blind party loyalty).

[cali]

5. Howard Dean too far to the left?

Excuse me while I chortle. Howard is as pragmatic as they come. That's not to say he doesn't have ideals that he sticks too closely, but the guy is a moderate. At least by VT standards. I respect him, I like him, I voted for him 5 times, but he no wild eyed lefty.

[empathy]

7. I stand corrected

You are right - he is not too far to the left. By any stretch.

But there are many who would have used his firmly held views to paint him as a lefty in a national election. In fact, they did asa much during the primaries. Some of his view are to the left (not to my left) and in the national spotlight, those views would have been the focus of the Repug campaign.

None the less, I think he could have won. Integrity is allegedly what drew people to Bush, in part. I dont think he could have claimed Dean was wishy-washy in his views.

I too like the guy a lot. I wish I knew him better.

[madfloridian]

2. He also said in another paragraph:

SNIP.."HD: Right. I think one the things we can all agree on is election fraud is a huge issue for us and we should move on that. I think the war is an incredibly foolish undertaking as you’re well aware. I think that we’re going to have to choose what our issues are going to be. It’s very hard to focus the attention of the country on maybe two or three issues at once. I think the war is a really important issue but I think that as time goes on particularly after the President’s inauguration, there will be more and more focus on the war, But right now, the election is fresh on our mind, and I really do think we should focus on the questionable results of the election in some of the states such as Ohio."

[Maat]

6. Gosh, I agree with everything you guys posted.

I really agree with almost all of what Howard Dean says. If there's something I disagree with, that he has said recently, I am unaware.

I really wish that he would be our DNC chair. However, I also understand the point-of-view that some have that he works better not tied down by a Beltway job.

I don't think that he will be DNC chair. He makes way too much sense, and he's a real Democrat, and he's a man of the People. I don't think that's what Beltway royalty wants.

[Merlot]

8. I want him to be the DNC chair

to keep him in the national spotlight. He's a leader, and can lead the DNC. As for being tied-down by a beltway job - maybe he could re-invent the job as well. I know it's all old boys there, but he could shake it up.

Either way, I'm glad he's speaking out, and hope he keeps it up.

[Cha]

4. Thanks for this, Laura.

There were many questions on another thread about.."What has Dean said about voter fraud?"..and here it is in black and white.

I hope that poster sees this so the burning questions can be answered!