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.

 

I hate to jump on the bandwagon but something smells fishy

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Before someone screams sore loser i will say no i did not vote for bush however at the same time this has nothing to do with kerry not winning it has to do with me questioning the results of all of the various items that where voted for or against on Tuesday. Now here are the things that should be puzzling the american people, first is how this election all came down to Ohio and that was known even prior to the election on Tuesday. Oddly enough Ohio has a 100,000 + provisional votes that have yet to be validated or counted, now lets think about this for a second did other states either not have as many provisional votes or did other states have the ability to count on thier fingers and toes quicker?


Then lets think of the whole concept of provisional ( or at least how i understand it ) Provisional votes are for people who think they are registered yet thier name does not appear on the voters list at the precinct they go to either its a clerical error, they went to the wrong precinct, or they just flat out arent registered. Now ill admit im not familiar with the exact procedures that are taken with provisional votes but im familiar with the voting process enought to know that no one is supposed to know how you voted unless you tell them otherwise there is not a record of how you voted. For example when i voted i went up they crossed my name off a paper list , i then went into a booth pushed a few buttons and i left the polls, no one recorded anything other then the fact i voted. So on provisional votes do they write your name down on the back of your vote? If not they have no way of saying if your vote is valid or not. Say they find out yes your vote was valid and they look over to the side and have 100,000 provisional votes on the side half for one guy and half for the next guy, unless they track who voted what then how do the decide which vote was yours?

This all has me slightly puzzled how is it possible that only one state in the US has this many uncounted provisional votes that according to what i originally read on cnn the actual total wouldnt be known for 11 days after the election. Now there are 49 other states to consider here and i dont see anything about them being not in for 11 days , as far as i know they are in and over with. So how is it possible that the state everyone was talking about before the election began becomes the state where people dont know where to vote? On the other side i know other states have provisional votes how is it possible they could count them and Ohio couldnt? Or is it possible the provisional votes in other sstates wouldnt have been enough to swing the majority vote so they didnt even bother with them? If the later is true that kinda defeats the whole "every vote counts" BS they have pumped up our a$$ for years doesnt it?

Also to make this even less of a sore loser thread you have to question a man who concedes an election when there are 100,000+ votes out that could win him the election yet to be counted and oddly enough those votes that where out just happened to be in counties that voted him in with the majority of thier allready counted votes. This means the man had a chance yet he just flat out said if i have to fight for it i give up ( this is my opinion ) Personally i wouldnt want anyone like that in office but then again i also dont want bush in there either so either way i go i lose.

Looking at the list of election problems that alledgedly happened in Ohio one of them stands out to me

"Cleveland. Voters have been receiving phone calls incorrectly informing them that their polling place had changed."

www.votersunite.org...

Could this have lent a hand in all the provisional votes?

Then look at the states that where not a big deal to either the democrats or the republicans , the ones with very few electoral votes that where concidered allready won by one of the two caniadates before the election even began. You will notice little to no voter probelems there granted some of this could be due to population differences but hell in KY there was only one probelem reported at all and it wasnt even one that would effect the outcome. I mean come on new york state which has a population of 18,976,457 had 4 reported problems, and Ohio with a population of 11,353,140 had 23 reported problems.




posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I believe with the provisional votes each person was assigned a number. They put that number on the ballot, not their name.

I used a machine and after they checked my name off of the list they gave me a number which I had to punch in the machine before I could start casting my votes.

Many people did not report their problems. My husband reported his at the polling station and he went totally ignored. After he heard of another polling place that was having the same problem he contacted MSNBC and the various voter fraud places.

Funny how the only problems the media reports are the ones that would favor Kerry. I feel like a broken record with the amount of times I've posted it, but my husbands vote for Bush turned into a vote for Kerry by the machine. It took him 8 attempts before the machine would finally allow him to vote for Bush.

Jemison



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Actaully i dont see a trend as far as to the voting problems being in Bush's favor or Kerrys i just see them being within questionable states that could have gone either way and could have changed the election by either giving bush more votes to win or giving kerry enough to win but they could go either way. As far as your husbands problem being ignored what state are you in perhaps i can find something on it. As for the placing of numbers on the back of provisional votes that means there had to be a cross refference list of names to numbers otherwise when you found john doe was not a registered voter you would have to have a list showing john doe had vote 110 so you could pull it. This is not annomous by any means.

Also again let it be said im not just questioning things that could have made kerry win im questioning things that could have made a difference either way. In esscence im questioning the whole process which i think we all should so we could prevent problems in the future, but then again wasnt that said by everyone 4 years ago?



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:23 AM
link   
nothing will ever be 100%....if we have a 99.9% success rate thats great...barring the election isnt as tight as 2000...



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Check into Diebold if you really think something smells funny. While a second Bush term is scary...the idea that we may no longer be in control of our nation, is even scarier.... My personal view is that the NWO has just made itself known, and is fully in power, and there isn't squat we can do about it....



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:35 AM
link   
www.votersunite.org...


From what i can see as far as reported errors in voting there are 255 in this list and out of 255 there are about 155 of them that where reported before tuesday and 100 after that given results wherent even close to being known until Early Wednesday morning/late Tuesday evening i would hardly say these problems where people complaining as to who won or lost.


So over 50% of the voter errors that where reported and logged by this organazation happened prior to the election really even technically starting. Now in ohio alone there are 23 logged errors or problems and out of those only 7 of them are on Tuesday or after then so that meand 16 errors happened from the get go, i would hardly say this is people going back and complaining as to who one or lost and being sore losers. Looks to me like there where legit complaints before the election even started.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Oh and again to unbias this thread , some of the problems where caused by democrats

seattletimes.nwsource.com...



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 10:00 AM
link   
What amny don't understand, it LOTS of counties are still using paper and pen for their ballots. What makes you think that a county in the middle of nowhere could not get rid of votes they did not wnat ot use, There has been corruption in voting for years, since the beginning, but since there are ore regulations things may come more to light.

MAybe 79.000 votes for Bush went ot Kerry, would that be OK? It is funny how the only elections that are contested are ones where republicans live.

I think we need a recount of Obama's win since he was black, and no way a black mnan could have won. Are people that ignorant. Now, why is that any different thatn syaing Bush stole the election. Start painting your hillary banners now.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Is anyone getting my point here? Im not saying kerry won nor am i saying bush won or lost im pointing out the series of errors that are questionable, no where am i contesting the winner nor losser im point out mere errors regardles. God i tried so hard to keep this thread from becomeing a your just questioning the results since kerry didnt win, jesus are people so set on bush that no one can even point out errors without even questioning his victory? Hell i pointed out errors made by the democratic party to keep this impartial.


Whenever i or anyone else mention all of the alledged voter manipulations or fraud the first thing everyone wants to say is " your just a sore loser" However does someone making that stament suddenly change the fact that these errors where made? No it does not ..............Truth be known i would be happy if neither of them where in office.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Check into Diebold if you really think something smells funny. While a second Bush term is scary...the idea that we may no longer be in control of our nation, is even scarier.... My personal view is that the NWO has just made itself known, and is fully in power, and there isn't squat we can do about it....
while youre at it, check Alex Jones stuff. This is all very obvious. There wont be any need to vote again. Its all an illusion.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I hear you minniescar, I keep getting the same reactions from people. It is VERY annoying! I don't give a crap who won either and wish that neither one did. This time, that was obviously not a possibility, but I would think that by 2012, 2016, 2020 or whenever it may be, people are going to wake up and realize that the two-party system is not one which is helping them and is in fact hurting them.
So if people just blatantly ignore that the Presidential election is likely manipulatable now, when it seems to be in its early stages, at least electronically, we will be guaranteeing the two-party system for the rest of our lives. I simply can't understand how ignorant most people are? I mean even regardless of the vulnerabilities of electronic voting, mainstream and local (mostly only local papers in the swing states now) media is flooded with reports of voter suppression and things of that nature. But nothing is even done about it. It is pathetic.
Voting machines supplied by private corporations are definitely one more thing to add to the list of serious threats to our future. This is absurd. I've spent a lot of time looking into this in the last couple of days and have a lot of info. I'll post it soon, when I finish merging it all together. I've mostly been looking at Ohio. Have you found any sites that show more specifics on which machines were used in each county, especially the machines that don't leave a paper trail? I just found some charts giving some idea of that, but their more related to supression via voting machines rather than their vulnerabilities:

www.dispatch.com.../2004/11/05/20041105-A2-03.html

www.dispatch.com.../2004/11/05/20041105-A2-04.html



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join