It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Study finds problems but no evidence of election fraud

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Democrats have no reason to lie about this so.....

Subject just won't die


Democrats find 2004 voting problems in Ohio

Reuters
Wednesday, June 22, 2005; 6:23 PM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than a quarter of voters, and more than half of black voters, experienced problems at Ohio polling places during the 2004 presidential vote, a Democratic Party report said on Wednesday.

But the problems were not enough to have changed the outcome in the state that put President Bush over the top in his battle for the White House with Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, it concluded.

The report cited long lines that discouraged voting, poorly trained election officials and difficulties with registration status, polling locations and absentee ballots.


Not really surprising as you'll find similar problems throughout the country. This is also nothing really new.

Sorry folks, looks like Bush really did win




posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
A study of under-resourced polling stations in urban areas in Ohio has not a lot of statistical sway in the total package of corruption and fraud it takes to steal a US election.

Just ask the relevant Secretaries of State about stonewalling of enquiries into the fraud, and even Walden O'Dell, Republican campaign manager in Ohio and also CEO of Diebold Inc, manufacturer of voting machines.

The US electoral system stinketh to high hell, and defence of it is a blight on the "democracy" that American people are taught to espouse with national pride.

[edit on 22-6-2005 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Nothing about the paper trail-less electronic voting in that article?



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Why should it be mentioned, Frith?
What was the percent of paperless machines used to the other methods used to cast votes during the election?
Was it enough to change the results of the election?





seekerof



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 10:46 PM
link   
I haven't followed this hugely, but as a Boxing fan I tend to listen to an announcer called Jim Lampley, he has been with HBO for a long time and has stood up to the powers that be many times over the problems within the boxing world. So it was interesting when I ran across his blog about the election and how bad it was. Once again, I haven't gollowed it, but I would feel easily about saying that Lampley has shown and proven himself to be a man of moral and principled stand... his article can be found

HERE




We know that margins for error are valid, and that results have fallen within the error range for every Presidential election for the past fifty years prior to last fall. NEVER have exit polls varied by beyond-error margins in a single state, not since 1948 when this kind of polling began. In this past election it happened in ten states, all of them swing states, all of them in Bush's favor. Coincidence? Of course not.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 11:46 PM
link   
To get the report spin-free go here:

www.democrats.org...

where it can be downloaded.

Report Cover Page
Table of Contents
Section I: Letter of Introduction to Governor Howard Dean
Section II: Executive Summary
Section III: Voting Experience Survey
Section IV: Provisional Ballot Survey
Section V: Inferences from the Provisional Ballot Survey
Section VI: Turnout, Residual Votes and Votes in Precincts and Wards
Section VII: Electronic Voting: Accuracy, Accessibility and Fraud
Section VIII: Transparent Aggregation of Voting Results Using the Internet
Section IX: Experience on the Ground in Ohio
Section X: Ohio Election Protection Summary
Section XI: Statewide Data Collection
Section XII: Recommendations for Future Action
Section XIII: Appendix


It may be worth a read for people who care a little about voting rights. Also for people that can read between the lines of Kerry's tacit support of electoral corruption.



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Passer By
I haven't followed this hugely, but as a Boxing fan I tend to listen to an announcer called Jim Lampley, he has been with HBO for a long time and has stood up to the powers that be many times over the problems within the boxing world.


So that makes him qualified to talk about matters within the boxing world, not within the realm of presidental elections. This is merely his opinion; nothing more, nothing less.



[EDIT]: typo.

[edit on 23-6-2005 by backtoreality]



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by backtoreality

Originally posted by Passer By
I haven't followed this hugely, but as a Boxing fan I tend to listen to an announcer called Jim Lampley, he has been with HBO for a long time and has stood up to the powers that be many times over the problems within the boxing world.


So that makes him qualified to talk about matters within the boxing world, not within the realm of presidental elections. This is merely his opinion; nothing more, nothing less.



[EDIT]: typo.

[edit on 23-6-2005 by backtoreality]


I would disagree completely. I would say that in life there are certain things that overlap. Comman sense is comman to all things, and if what he is saying is true, regardless on where the truth comes from surely you must accept it.

Were there ten swing states? Did all of them go to Bush? What is the history of the margin of error in advance polling? If what he says about those things are true then what he is saying ISN'T opinion it is fact.

If they aren't true then yes it is an opinion( albeit one backed up by trial evidense of a man who claimed he was programming on a computer program for the election and explained why the advance polling was so off base) and obviously a wrong one, however, if they are........




top topics



 
0

log in

join