Kerry/Edwards Ohio Strategery

Originally posted by Noumenon
Even if BinBush somehow won the popularity contest - and I ain't saying he did, au contraire - the whole felon-infested administration is ripe for taking large heat and going down. Like Slim Pickens riding the bomb all the way down, the administration is going to crash and burn, shouting "yee-ha" all the way.

And that's why the Dems are playing it so cool right now.

Thats what i have been thinking lately also.
Why else wouldnt Bush have sold out Rumsfeld yet?Cause,rummsy "Knows" things.he's an old hand,he wouldnt let himself become dispensable.

Hey Kid,

No insult intended, hard to see how you took my post that way.

Yes, I know about Cook County politics, my great-uncle was busy manufacturing votes for the Kelly machine way back in the 30's.

Legitimacy is by definition what is lawful or justifiable and conforming to existing rules. You can call the judges corrupt, the lawmakers, too, but if they recognize G.W. as President, that's what he is, regardless of the anger of the losers, because that's the law.

As for cheating, I know for sure Democrats did here in Michigan by keeping thier polling locations in thier strong precincts open past 8. (Mr. Conyers' friends on the bench in Detroit writing injunctions to allow this have made this an regular election day event, and John Ashcroft lost his senate seat because of the same shenanigans in Missouri.)

As Seeker wisely councils, prove your case in court. The evidence I've seen looks refutable, but I'm sure that's what the V.R.W.C. wants us to believe.

Originally posted by Realist05
Hey Kid,

No insult intended, hard to see how you took my post that way.

Yes, I know about Cook County politics, my great-uncle was busy manufacturing votes for the Kelly machine way back in the 30's.

Legitimacy is by definition what is lawful or justifiable and conforming to existing rules. You can call the judges corrupt, the lawmakers, too, but if they recognize G.W. as President, that's what he is, regardless of the anger of the losers, because that's the law.

As for cheating, I know for sure Democrats did here in Michigan by keeping thier polling locations in thier strong precincts open past 8. (Mr. Conyers' friends on the bench in Detroit writing injunctions to allow this have made this an regular election day event, and John Ashcroft lost his senate seat because of the same shenanigans in Missouri.)

As Seeker wisely councils, prove your case in court. The evidence I've seen looks refutable, but I'm sure that's what the V.R.W.C. wants us to believe.

Nowhere in the constitution does it say that keeping polsl open longer then state is against the rules. On the other hand fraudulent votes are on the list of violations. You can't play the polls open past 8 card. I sure as hell know kids werent able to vote here cause #tard Buddy Johnson didnt get extra ballots to paper polling places until 8:30. ROFL

Originally posted by Realist05


As Seeker wisely councils, prove your case in court. The evidence I've seen looks refutable, but I'm sure that's what the V.R.W.C. wants us to believe.

First of all,

Second of all, when the pendulum swings, you and those on the right so quick to sweep fraud under the rug, are gonna be howling bloody murder. Those who then are disenfranchised are just gonna havta suck it up and get over it, as the right loves to say. You'll deserve what you get.

Those who put any party over the good of the nation on the whole, are wholly undeserving of Democracy.

as posted by EastCoastKid
Those who then are disenfranchised are just gonna havta suck it up and get over it, as the right loves to say. You'll deserve what you get.

I assume that this wise council that you so give would likewise apply to you?

Btw, how comes that presentation of evidences and proofs before the Ohio Supreme Court coming along?



seekerof

Seekerof,
It applies to me, it applies to you, it applies to anyone who claims to support Democracy and LEGITIMATE elections.

Here's what's new today. Give it a read.

Ten preliminary reasons why the Bush vote does not compute, and why Congress must investigate rather than certify the Electoral College (Part One of Two)
by Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
January 3, 2005

The presidential vote for George W. Bush does not compute.

By examining a very wide range of sworn testimonies from voters, polling officials and others close to the administration of the Nov. 2 election; by statistical analysis of the certified vote by mathematicians, election experts and independent research teams who have conducted detailed studies of the results in Ohio, New Mexico, Florida and elsewhere; from experts who studied the voting machines, tabulators and other electronic equipment on which a fair vote count has depended; and from a team of attorneys and others who have challenged the Ohio results; the freepress.org investigative team has compiled a portrait of an election whose true outcome must be investigated further by the Congress, the media and all Americans -- because it was almost certainly not an honest victory for George W. Bush.
www.freepress.org...

Freepress.org. Now there's an rational, objective voice.
By the way, Rossi should concede Washington to Gregouri. She stole the governorship fair and square

Why don't you Bush sycophants just admit, you will read nothing, accept nothing that criticizes his legitimacy.

Such selectivity only hurts you, Bushfanz. Stay in the dark, if that is where you truly feel most comfortable. Know this, though; that darkness is nothing more than a shrowd concealing your fear.

Not in the dark, not afraid, willing to look at a rational argument, when one is presented. And, by the way, supportive of Clinton and Gregoiri regardless
of how I voted because that's the process.
If you believe the federal government is illegitimate, I suggest putting your money where your blog is and refuse to recognize it, stop paying taxes (presuming that a lib ideologue does) and join the street people shouting obscenities at WTO meetings. Maybe that's what the left has left.
I'll crawl back to my cave and put my "shrowd" on now, confident that the laughing smileys are hiding a lot pain and confusion.

Originally posted by Realist05
If you believe the federal government is illegitimate, I suggest putting your money where your blog is and refuse to recognize it, stop paying taxes (presuming that a lib ideologue does) and join the street people shouting obscenities at WTO meetings. Maybe that's what the left has left.

Yeah, right pal. I'll let my left-leaning friends in on your sage advice.



[edit on 19-09-2003 by EastCoastKid]

Exit polls don't lie. Exit polls on Nov. 2 had Kerry ahead of Bush. I'd love it if someone could explain to me why it is our government supports exit poll data in the Ukraine, and yet does not, here in the USA..

Footprints of Electoral Fraud: Early numbers

www.globalresearch.ca...

auto..._sol.tao.ca/node/view/985?PHPSESSID=89809e29...



The National Election Pool�s own data�as transmitted by CNN on the evening of November 2 and the early morning of November 3�suggest very strongly that the results of the exit polls were themselves fiddled late on November 2 in order to make their numbers conform with the tabulated vote tallies.

It is important to remember how large the discrepancy was between the early vote tallies and the early exit poll figures. By the time polls were closing in the eastern states, the vote-count figures published by CNN showed Bush leading Kerry by a massive 11 percent margin. At 8:50 p.m. EST, Bush was credited with 6,590,476 votes, and Kerry with 5,239,414. This margin gradually shrank. By 9:00 p.m., Bush purportedly had 8,284,599 votes, and Kerry 6,703,874; by 9:06 p.m., Bush had 9,257,135, and Kerry had 7,652,510, giving the incumbent a 9 percent lead, with 54 percent of the vote to Kerry�s 45 percent.
www.democraticunderground.com...

The 2004 Presidential Election: Who Won The Popular Vote? An Examination of the Comparative Validity of Exit Poll and Vote Count Data
by Jonathan D. Simon, J.D. and Ron P. Baiman, Ph.D.
December 29, 2004

Executive Summary:

There is a substantial discrepancy�well outside the margin of error and outcomedeterminative� between the national exit poll and the popular vote count.
The possible causes of the discrepancy would be random error, a skewed exit poll, or breakdown in the fairness of the voting process and accuracy of the vote count.
Analysis shows that the discrepancy cannot reasonably be accounted for by chance or random error.
Evidence does not support hypotheses that the discrepancy was produced by problems with the exit poll.
Widespread breakdown in the fairness of the voting process and accuracy of the vote count are the most likely explanations for the discrepancy.
In an accurate count of a free and fair election, the strong likelihood is that Kerry would have been the winner of the popular vote.

Download the paper (PDF, File size: 2.1 MB)
freepress.org...

Exit polls most certainly can lie, here's what US News and World Report's Michael Barone (a polling expert) wrote:

Why were the initial exit poll results more Democratic than the actual tabulated vote? No one is sure, though the national sample at midafternoon, which showed Kerry ahead 50 to 49 percent, was 58 percent women. My own suspicion is that some Democrats�at the command level, or somewhere below�had an election-day project of slamming the results. New Hampshire, Minnesota and Pennsylvania initial exit poll results had huge margins for Kerry�much larger percentages than he won in any pre-election poll. If somebody had slipped some Democratic operative the list of exit poll sites�40 to 50 sites in each critical state�he or she could have slipped several hundred operatives into the polling places to take the exit poll ballots and vote for Kerry. The results would have shown Kerry much farther ahead than he actually was and, broadcast through drugdereport.com and other sources, could have heartened Kerry supporters during the afternoon and disheartened Bush supporters. When I was active in Democratic politics, in 1964-80, it would have occurred to us to do no such thing. But Democrats these days are so filled with a sense of grievance and with a feeling of justification for employing any dirty tactics to win, that this is not unthinkable. If people can game the exit polls, there's not much point to having exit polls any more.

Here is the entire article www.usnews.com....

The desired effect would be similar to that of the Florida panhandle during the 2000 election where polls were still open in the central time zone when the major networks called Florida early for Gore...many Republicans on the way to the polls turned around and went home instead of voting.

Also, why don't I hear anyone talking about the Democratic operatives that slashed the tires of vans rented to help elderly and handicapped Republicans get to the polls in Ohio?

[edit on 1/4/2005 by djohnsto77]

[edit on 1/4/2005 by djohnsto77]

Got any articles on that?

Explain why the same pundits hail the veracity of exit polls in Ukraine.

Regarding the tire slashing, here's one:
www.jsonline.com...

There are also reports of vandalization of Republican headquarters all over the nation:
www.dailyvanguard.com...
www.6newslawrence.com...
www.nbc4i.com...
Just to list a few.

As far as the Ukrainian situation, I don't think the exit polls were the deciding factor, there was a plethora of evidence witnessed by international observers of ballot box stuffing, voter intimidation (I mean things like violent beatings, not simply long lines), and armed men storming polling centers to seize ballot boxes. There was also direct evidence from the actual vote tabulation that something was wrong -- vote totals were up by an incredible amount in pro-Yanukovych areas in the east of the country while it was inline with expectations in the pro-Yushchenko west.

Here's an article entitled Revealed: the full story of the Ukrainian election fraud:

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2004/11/28/wukra28.xml

The article doesn't even mention exit poll data.

I see no evidence of anything remotely like that happening during the 2004 Presidential election here -- if anything there were far more attacks on Republican voters' rights perpetrated by Democrats than the other way around.

If the vote tabulation is incorrect why does it agree with the polling data taken in the days leading up to the election? The averages of the pre-election polls had Bush leading Kerry by one to several points consistantly in the months prior to the election right up to the last polls taken. If the tabulated vote totals and the pre-election polls agree and the one thing that doesn't is the exit polls, I would tend to think that the one dataset that doesn't agree is flawed, not the other two.

Thanks for the links. One thing before I answer your points: Who did you vote for?

as posted by ECK
Exit polls don't lie.

Really?
Seems that despite what exit polls normally and usually indicate, they have been wrong in the past?
Exit polls are subjective. A person, who supposedly voted, can tell a pollster whatever they deem.
It's voter's that don't lie! Screw exit polls. Its the voters that determine results and thats what counts, not exit polls.



seekerof

Exit polls using the methodologies of 2 November have not been previously wrong, anywhere in the world.

Prove otherwise.

Actually, they have, and you prove otherwise, being I asserted it first and you are the one refuting.



seekerof

Typical.

*Invites one-line response warning, but adds comment about how the US should have no place in monitoring elections overseas until its electoral system has more than a semblance of credibility restored. *

The science of exit polling in the case of 2004 delivered a more accurate impression than the corrupt and fraudulent tabulations that went on inside machines and in several locked down counting rooms. Fraud is bad.

And also typical. No sources but your own melodramatics, etc.

Florida, 2000. (one example).



seekerof