It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by feyd rautha
Sometimes i meet people who talk nonsence to me, like you, on the subway. First i tell them with a friendly smile on my face to go to hell, if they do not respect my warning and take my smile as an invitation to speak on, i bitchslap them untill they cry for mercy. i am not a violent psycho, but for some people words are just not enought. i really would enjoy to meet you on the subs one day.
Introduction: Did George W. Bush steal America's 2004 election?
by Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
June 16, 2005
• Despite repeated pre-election calls from officials across the nation and the world, Ohio's Republican Secretary of State, who also served as Ohio's co-chair for the Bush-Cheney campaign, refused to allow non-partisan international and United Nations observers the access they requested to monitor the Ohio vote. While such access is routinely demanded by the U.S. government in third world nations, it was banned in the American heartland.
• A post-election headline from the Akron Beacon Journal cites a critical report by twelve prominent social scientists and statisticians, reporting:
"Analysis Points to Election ‘Corruption': Group Says Chance of Exit Polls Being So Wrong in '04 Vote is One-in-959,000."
• Citing "Ohio's Odd Numbers," investigative reporter Christopher Hitchens", a Bush supporter, says in Vanity Fair: "Given what happened in that key state on Election Day 2004, both democracy and common sense cry out for a court-ordered inspection of its new voting machines."
• Paul Krugman of the New York Times writes: "It's election night, and early returns suggest trouble for the incumbent. Then, mysteriously, the vote count stops and observers from the challenger's campaign see employees of a voting-machine company, one wearing a badge that identifies him as a county official, typing instructions at computers with access to the vote-tabulating software.
When the count resumes, the incumbent pulls ahead. The challenger demands an investigation. But there are no ballots to recount, and election officials allied with the incumbent refuse to release data that could shed light on whether there was tampering with the electronic records.
Originally posted by thelibra
Originally posted by OpenSecret2012 Then why even have a popular vote in teh first place? LOL!
If as you say the electorial college decides the election(s)?
Does ANYONE pay attention in class anymore? Or do they just listen to the same regurgitated crap that the ignorant have been feeding each other for generations?
If you don't know why there's an electoral college, or even whether or not they control the vote, how on Earth can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you claim election fraud?
Your assignment is to look up (on a REPUTABLE site, like Wikipedia) the Electoral vote vs. the Popular vote, how it works, and why it was instituted, and if you can't be bothered to learn it, you really have no business posting anything regarding the current voting system.
Yargh! Sorry, it just really makes me mad when people can't even be bothered to look up HOW the voting works, and then go about bashing the system in ignorance.
Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Sorry, but Fahrenheit 9/11 was completely lacking in objectivity and was just as biased (and therefore questionable in terms of evidence) as any other rabidly anti- or pro- conspiracy fodder.
Moore, whilst a dab hand at certain types of journalism, shot himself in the foot (so to speak) on that one; while there were issues of veracity about BFC, the same trend of perhaps "manipulating certain facts" in F9/11 was exaggerated to the point where it undermined the real facts which were presented.
Sorry, but quoting MM doesn't make something more or less "true".
Though if I used the wrong Snopes debunking, then I'm fine with admitting I'm wrong
Originally posted by OpenSecret2012
I wanted to know his opinion (or anyone elses?) about why they still have people vote? ...... When its now common knowlege the Electorial College decides who wins, not voters.