It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Was The Election Rigged ? Voting Numbers Altered

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:29 AM
There is something wrong here.
No one I have talked to since the election is happy with the outcome.
Some Facts

Bush Narrowly Beat Gore to get into office and it took some throwing out of votes to get it done.

I doubt that people that did not vote for Bush in 2000, voted for him in 2004

I would think that there was a large number of people that did vote for Bush in 2000 did not vote for him in 2004 because of the war and other issues

This year the largest number of voters turned out to vote than have turned out in a long time, many first time voters and they were not coming out to vote for bush, but to get rid of him.

So answer me this, if the same number of people that voted for Bush in 2000 voted for him this time, and the same number that voted against him in 2000 voted against him this time and you then add all the new voters that voted to get Bush out, HOW DID HE WIN ?

I smell a rat, the numbers don't add up correctly and more than likely have been manufactured. We have already seen how than gave Bush the first election by not counting votes. This time I think they worked on their system to the point that they could control the numbers given to the people.
If they ( THE NWO ) have their people in the positions of those that tally and report the numbers of the votes, it would be very easy to do. Because most people don't think of this possibility it would not be questioned by most.

posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:35 AM
I know of at least 7 people who did not vote for Bush in 2000 but voted for him in 2004. Most of them voted for Nader in 2000 and though they have no love for Bush they detested Kerry so much they wanted to be sure that Kerry did not get elected.

I'm frustrated with all of these 'election must be rigged' posts. My husband voted for Bush and yet Kerry kept appearing as his choice on the machine. It took him 8 attempts before the machine finally allowed him to vote for Bush. My husbands case was not an isolated incident. This happened to many people in California according to a friend who worked at the polls.

What type of voting system would make you feel more comfortable for future elections? Is there any voting method that would make you feel as if it could not be rigged?


posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:38 AM
I am afraid the only voting system that many in the democratic party would trust is one in which their candidate is victorious.

Unless they reform their platform, that ain't EVER going to happen.

posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:39 AM
To make sure that you're aware of the open opportunity for fraudulence with the architecture of the Diebold machines, check all the other threads on election fraud and read the following before commenting:

Who you know that voted what has not much to do with the issue of systematic removal of democratic rights.

posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:40 AM
Not too sure bud.

I'll tell you what though. This was the first time I voted on an electronic machine that didn't print something out.

Granted I live in a heavily red state that wasn't in play, so my vote didn't really have that much sway in the national election.

However, something was very cold about doing that. I hit a few buttons, it spit out my yellow card, and I was done. No receipt, no punch card thing, no aftertaste, nada.

I think widescale election fraud with paper ballots is harder to pull off. Extemely hard.

So, if there is an evidence of fraud I'd say it would be with the e-voting machines. Then again, what is the evidence?

I don't know if I believe anything is corrupt. Upset, yes, but I don't know if I buy into the fraud thing. There was plenty of shady things that went down prior to the elction by both sides. I just think the left depended on the youth vote to much and underestimated the turnout in Bush's favor.

Remember, people can stand in lines forever in blue districts to vote, but if people have already voted in the red districts and it's more votes they're still going to win. No matter how long people stand in line to vote against the incumbant. Long lines get the news coverage, not thousdands of smaller districts that are completely red and have no wait time.

The interesting thing is what the Dems will do from here. I think it needs to be looked at much like a sports franchise that did not deliver as promissed. Management needs to be reshuffled and fresh blood needs to get in. It is rebuilding time and they've got 2 years to start getting things in place to get some power back, or at least even thigns out a bit.

Terry should be worried about his job at the DNC. I know I would be.

posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:40 AM
Yea, it is kind of strange how he managed to win. But I think some non-republicans actually voted for Bush this time around. My mother for instance is a Democrat - but she voted for Bush. I think the media propaganda gets to people. Bush claims to be stronger versus terrorism than Kerry and then what do we see the week before elections? An Usama Bin Ladin tape is released and scares the people into voting for him. Barbara Bush released a book which appeals to just about every midwest or southern mom. My mother basically told me that she voted for Bush because she saw in Barbara's book that they were "human" and "emotional." Take this how you may...

- Attero

posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 10:43 AM
I have heard the opposite story, that people that were trying to vote for Kerry were continually getting Bush coming up.

This is exactly my point, there has to be some truth to this, whether it was for bush or kerry these strange happenings at the polls prove that something is amiss, I think they ( NWO ) are playing games with us and laughing at our ignorance.

new topics


log in