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.

 

Even when they die, the democrats keep voting

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   
And people wonder why honest Americans want things like picture IDs when you vote...

www.thejournalnews.com.../20061029/NEWS05/610290334/1021

excerpt:
Among the Journal's findings:

- There were dead people on the voter rolls in all of New York's 62 counties and people in as many as 45 counties who had votes recorded after they had died.

- One Bronx address was listed as the home for as many as 191 registered voters who had died. The address is 5901 Palisade Ave., in Riverdale, site of the Hebrew Home for the Aged.

- Democrats who cast votes after they died outnumbered Republicans by more than 4 to 1...

end excerpt



[edit on 30-10-2006 by Apoc]




posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
One Bronx address was listed as the home for as many as 191 registered voters who had died. The address is 5901 Palisade Ave., in Riverdale, site of the Hebrew Home for the Aged.


The part you didn't include from that report, which follows immediately after the above quote;




Your Link

Most of them came from Democrat-dominated New York City, where the higher population produced more matches

-also-

In most cases, instances of dead voters can be attributed to database mismatches and clerical errors. For instance, the Social Security Administration admits there are people in its master death index who are not dead.

They include Wappingers Falls resident Hilde Stafford, an 85-year-old native of Germany. The master index lists her date of death as June 15, 1997.

"I'm still alive," she said. "I still vote."


(Bolding mine)

Seems to me, after reading that link through, that you seem more interested in gleaning those parts which line up with a particular political bias.

Maybe I'm mistaken, and if so I apologize.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 06:32 PM
link   
For instance,


The numbers do not indicate how much fraud is the result of dead voters in New York, only the potential for it. Typically, records of votes by the dead are the result of bookkeeping errors and do not mean any extra ballots were actually cast.

The Journal did not find any fraud in the local matches it investigated.



tsk tsk...naughty politically divisive not the whole story stuff going on. Maybe because it's Halloweeny time!



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Busted!

Apoc, great example of how to distort the truth in order to further your own political agenda.

How typically Neo-Con.


This thread should be dumped.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 12:16 AM
link   
He didn't distort the story, and this isn't the place for using political labels as insults. Please refrain from doing so.

The important thing here isnt that there are lots of errors and some shennanigans, its that there are 4 times as many registered democrats that are dead but still on the roles than there are republicans. NYC is overwhelmingly democratic, but the rest of new york isn't. There are something like 19 million people in NYS, of which 8 million are in New York City. That would require, to explain the 4:1 ratio, that NYC vote tally records are somehow mearly 8 times as error prone as the rest of the state, which seems unlikely. Of course, this is a simplification, nyc has republicans, and the rest of the state has democrats, but simple error does not explain the 4:1 ratio.


The numbers do not indicate how much fraud is the result of dead voters in New York, only the potential for it.

What this is saying is, 'yes, we have a record of these people, who are dead, having voted in the last election, but, don't worry, its probably just a clerical error'.
That does not make sense. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. That does not make sense.


From the comments section on that page:
www.elections.state.ny.us...

There are around 3.1 million registered republicans in NYS, and around 5.6 million registered democrats in NYS.

Its simply does not make sense to say that there are random clerical errors, producing a 4:1 ration of dem:repub.
And, if it were true, then it should've been easy enough for the reporter to have found out, whats the ratio of nyc dead voters compared to outside of the city? There are around 3 million registered democrats in NYC, and 2.6 million outside of NYC. So that 3 million, we are supposed to beleive, is producing the bulk of that four-fold difference????? Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. That does not make sense.



[edit on 31-10-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 12:29 AM
link   
I find the concept that the left is honest and the right is dishonest... well dishonest. If you naturally accuse another of cheating then you had better not be a cheater yourself.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Probably that Diebold software kicking in. Its probably adding random voters...some of them end up being dead ones. Since NYC is mainly democrat, there should be no reason for them to have to add votes.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
He didn't distort the story, and this isn't the place for using political labels as insults. Please refrain from doing so.

My appologies, but I found the title of this thread combined with the selective quoting of the source to be a distasteful and misleading tactic.

The labeling wasn't required tho. I should have been more generalistic.
I really don't like when selectively incomplete information is used to debate political agendas. I don't care who does it, I think it's wrong.

A more acurate title for this thread would be "Problems with the Voting system" or "Dead People Vote". It does not. It directly suggests that only democrates continue to vote, post-mortum.

Further, the ratio of 4:1 is well within statisical deviation given the political context. There's no great mystery here. There's nothing here to support a conspiracy.

What's presented is proof that the system needs overhauling.
If that was the intent of the poster, then yes... I was totally out-of-line.
It appears to me that it isn't the case, however.

I stated that I think trying to use this as a political wedge issue is a diservice to ATS and the posters here... I just stated it very badly.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Probably that Diebold software kicking in. Its probably adding random voters...some of them end up being dead ones. Since NYC is mainly democrat, there should be no reason for them to have to add votes.


I love it when Dems keep bringing up Diebold and"stolen elections". Then they get all upset the day after a major election when they lose. When it was their voter suppression that caused the loss. If you keep telling people their vote doesn't count, how many are going to actually vote? PLEASE keep it up!



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Shame this article only focused on dead people, that's just the tip of the iceburg regarding inaccuracies in voter registration in NY.

There is absolutely nothing done to verify elligibility in the registration process, just fill out the form and mail it in. The voter registration rolls are full of people who no longer live where their registration is, people who have changed their names and are listed under both names and I suspect people who just don't exist.

They rely too heavily on mailings to registered voters to purge the lists. If the card is returned as undeliverable the name comes off, but if goes into a mailbox where the resident just throws it out (which is the most likely scenario) the name stays.

Another serious problem is that there is no effort to verify that the person is not also registered elsewhere, and some people do vote in more than one place because they know no one is checking.

If I had to say what the real problem is, it's flat out incompetence, and if what I've seen in NY is any indication of how bad the problem is in the country all I can say is voter registration is a joke. I also have to really emphasize that this is not a Democrat or Republican issue as both sides clearly just don't care to do anything about it.

Then you have the serious problem of absentee voting, which in many cases outside of NYC decide the vote. The ballots themselves must be absolutely anonymous once they are opened, however they are returned in an envelope that must identify yourself. It's no big deal to have ballots just vanish before they are opened and so easy to just pull a small handful of ballots from one party or the other so they vanish just prior to opening them for counting.

Then there is the problem of the machines that don't add up and no one seems to care about that either. When a machine spits out total results it shows for each race the number cast for each candidate and the number of people who didn't cast a vote in that race. That should add up to the total number of voters and that number should be the same in every race. It isn't. It's such a glaring oversight and no one says a word.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by BitRaiser
My appologies, but I found the title of this thread combined with the selective quoting of the source to be a distasteful and misleading tactic.

The labeling wasn't required tho. I should have been more generalistic.

Fair enough.



Further, the ratio of 4:1 is well within statisical deviation given the political context. There's no great mystery here. There's nothing here to support a conspiracy.

How? There aren't 4 times as many democrats registered in ny than republicans. Half the registered democrats in NYS are in NYC, and yet the claim is that NYC voting recorders are so inept that they are responsible for that huge jump in numbers? And what then, that means that there's no dead registered republicans voting errors anywhere outside of NYC? Because with the number of registered republicans in NYC, and this imaginary incredibly high error rate in NYC, that'd make NYC entirely responsible for the republican error, which doesn't make any sense at all.
Clearly, its a conspiracy. The ratios attest to it.


What's presented is proof that the system needs overhauling.

Whats needed is to purge the election officials that 'in error' just happened to record 4 times as many democratic votes are republican ones, and then investigate the voting machinery (the people and committees) involved in it.


rrconservative
I love it when Dems keep bringing up Diebold and"stolen elections". Then they get all upset the day after a major election when they lose.

lets face it, the republicans are the ones that are going to be complaining about any democratic gains, especially now that the voting machines are largely owned by a company tied Hugo Chavez.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan


Further, the ratio of 4:1 is well within statisical deviation given the political context. There's no great mystery here. There's nothing here to support a conspiracy.

How? There aren't 4 times as many democrats registered in ny than republicans. Half the registered democrats in NYS are in NYC, and yet the claim is that NYC voting recorders are so inept that they are responsible for that huge jump in numbers? And what then, that means that there's no dead registered republicans voting errors anywhere outside of NYC? Because with the number of registered republicans in NYC, and this imaginary incredibly high error rate in NYC, that'd make NYC entirely responsible for the republican error, which doesn't make any sense at all.
Clearly, its a conspiracy. The ratios attest to it.

I don't have time to explain this fully and properly (It's halloween and I've got a lot to do!), but here's a quick attempt to explain why a 4:1 ratio isn't suprising in this case.

Statistical deviation of random events in an imbalanced system is more likely to produce a multiplier in favor of the majority. The math behind why this is true if fairly complex, but it is solid math and something we covered in statistical analysis. Remember, this figure represents only one snapshot of random deviation. I'm sure that if you were to average the number of dead voters over the last few decades, you would get a result that is much more in-line with the realities of population's demographics.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   
For those that say I was trying to be sneaky or was trying to hide something, well I did POST THE LINK TO THE SOURCE. Did I think people would not check it? I hid nothing. I posted what I labeled as an excerpt because, in my opinion, it was the interesting part of the article. The source of the story is an obviously democrat biased news organization trying to spin emperical data to suit their political slant. I disagree with their statistical analysis. 4 to 1 is 4 to 1. That means that 4 times the number of democrats voted fradulently. No amount of spin on city demographics can change that. Do dems typically win by 4 to 1 margins? Ask Pataki or Giuliani. Do I have a political slant? Yes, I'm conservative. I have no problem admitting it. I'm proud of it. Why can't news organizations (or other member of ATF) admit what THEY are instead of trying to hide behind some false "independent" tag.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
Why can't news organizations (or other member of ATF) admit what THEY are instead of trying to hide behind some false "independent" tag.


You mean like FOX?



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Statistical deviation of random events in an imbalanced system is more likely to produce a multiplier in favor of the majority.

I'm sorry, but that does not explain the 4:1 ratio. There are 3.1 million registered republicans in NYS, and 5.6 registered democrats. Normal would be 2:1, a deviation of 3:1 would be acceptable, but 4:1 is nonsense.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Statistical deviation of random events in an imbalanced system is more likely to produce a multiplier in favor of the majority.

I'm sorry, but that does not explain the 4:1 ratio. There are 3.1 million registered republicans in NYS, and 5.6 registered democrats. Normal would be 2:1, a deviation of 3:1 would be acceptable, but 4:1 is nonsense.

As I said... it's not an easy thing to explain. I spent 6 months of school trying to bend my head around the math involved in this sort of expected deviation. I've since made an amature study of chaos/fractel mathmatics for the last 8 years.

In this particular case, I'm not suprised at all by the aboration being as large as 4:1.

If someone could pull the historic records of this issue, I'm positive that you would find that the averages balance out to a more expected ratio.

Please, try to remember that a single unexpected event does not constitue a conspiracy. Unless someone can present some sort of pattern, or at the vary least a reoccurance of this event, it remains a statistical fluke.
Nothing more.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
Do I have a political slant? Yes, I'm conservative. I have no problem admitting it. I'm proud of it. Why can't news organizations (or other member of ATF) admit what THEY are instead of trying to hide behind some false "independent" tag.


Some of us believe that being politcally biased is a large part of the problem. When you believe "your side" to be right, you will never accept that they might be wrong. You spend your time looking for ways to prove your side right, not looking at the issue objectivly. When you choose a side, you reject all else.

When you step away from taking sides, only then can you truly look at the system in it's entirety and say "Wait a sec... it's ALL F#cked up!"

I think the artical you quoted does a very nice job of showing that it's the system that needs some major work. It's not the Neo-Cons, it's not the Dems... it's the whole damned thing.

As long as people continue to engade in partisen/biased politics, nothing will ever be solved. The system will never be fixed. Nothing will get better.

Step away and look.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 07:12 AM
link   
This just means that Democrats are more likely to stay politically active in their grave than are Republicans.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   
It does not matter one little bit about voting for any party at any time at anywhere - they are all for the same agenda CONTROLLING YOU.
In US & A Bush & Kerry are cousins both @ bohemian grove visiting skull & bones scum. Pretending to be enemies in public they were laughing at you lot together at the grove.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 05:13 PM
link   
The link to the article doesn't work, but it supposedly claims: (a) Both dead democrats and dead Republicans cast votes. (b) More dead democrats voted.

How do we know how the dead people voted? How do you know the dead Democrats didn't vote Republican?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join