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.

 

2004 Electoral Disaster (truthout.org)

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
In reality, the republic came just 0.12% of all votes shy of picking "liberalism" (in your words).


That would have been interesting. Looking at this map,
it certainly seems to me that most of America is conservative.
(or at least anti-Kerry)

Kerry appealed to the pockets of liberalism in the big cities. If
Kerry had gotten in, he would have been VERY out of touch
with most of America.



[edit on 11/8/2004 by FlyersFan]


But if the vote machines and counts were as corrupt as it seems, that map is fiction and propaganda. Would some red-staters/conservatives/republicans please rebut the Diebold tampering as someone asked earlier in this thread?

If there was a complete, open, multi-partisan investigation into the whole vote fraud issue, and still came with those counts, then fine, 4 more years til we get a "fair" chance at freedom. But it seems the colors on the map were drawn in to suit whoever controlled the voting, then released as fact, "after the fact".

There are just waaay too many reports of fraud & tampering for it to be purely a case of sore losership. I have to admit, if it were my side that won, I'd be apt to gloss over complaints too, hence the call for a wide open investigation. Both sides plus neutral "referees". How can that be a bad thing?




posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 01:24 PM
link   
The main problem is that both sides distrust each other.

even your statement "If there was a complete, open, multi-partisan investigation into the whole vote fraud issue, and still came with those counts, then fine, 4 more years til we get a "fair" chance at freedom. But it seems the colors on the map were drawn in to suit whoever controlled the voting, then released as fact, "after the fact". " shows your partisan bent. what do you mean by "fair" chance at freedom? We have freedom now, you can leave the country anytime you want, you can leave any state, move anywhere you want. Is that not freedom? what you really mean is when do we libs get to have a chance to run America. It has nothing to do with fairness.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Nice try with the "Bush Country" map, but most of your "Bush Country" is unpopulated.
bigpicture.typepad.com...



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   
I like that map also, I still see a lot of red.



so this map just shows us what we already know, it not that populated out west, and what is, is Bush Country.

[edit on 8/11/04 by jrsdls]



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   
There is a lot of red - Bush won.

But is isn't misleading like the first map.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ethereal There is a lot of red - Bush won.
These maps are still very misleading as they only reflect county-wins, not popular vote. Calling a couty where Bush won by 2% "Bush Country" is not very accurate now is it? All these things do is shove more wedges into the divide.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
acutally that map was based on a usatoday map. it shows the counties that was won by each canindate. it was not based on population, but on who won that particular county. both maps are accurate, one just shows the population density and one shows the results of the election based on the counties.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 02:26 PM
link   
You're right SO, I was just trying to make a point that the "Bush Country" map was absurd. Here is the purple map.

bigpicture.typepad.com...

bigpicture.typepad.com...
[edit on 11/8/04 by Ethereal]

[edit on 11/8/04 by Ethereal]



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jrsdls
The main problem is that both sides distrust each other.

even your statement "If there was a complete, open, multi-partisan investigation into the whole vote fraud issue, and still came with those counts, then fine, 4 more years til we get a "fair" chance at freedom. But it seems the colors on the map were drawn in to suit whoever controlled the voting, then released as fact, "after the fact". " shows your partisan bent. what do you mean by "fair" chance at freedom? We have freedom now, you can leave the country anytime you want, you can leave any state, move anywhere you want. Is that not freedom? what you really mean is when do we libs get to have a chance to run America. It has nothing to do with fairness.


Of course I'm partisan! So is anyone who voted and has opinions on the whole deal. That's why an investigation should include all sides and then some. If everyone is looking at the same info and getting the same picture, it kind of cancels out the partisanship. Then I could gripe about waiting 4 years for a "fair" election in the spirit of a slightly disgruntled "loser". Not in the spirit of a disenfranchised citizen, as may be the case for myself and thousands across the country.

I'd like to know the facts, even if they just confirmed what's being released as election results now. I don't mean when do we libs get to run america. The people who run america have been and will be the people with money. Some just make things a little nicer for the folks they make money off of in the process. What I mean is when can we be assured that we are being governed as is provided for in america's founding documents?

And again, why don't any "non-libs" want to see an investigation into voter fraud? Like the patriot act backers say: If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
First: understand the US is not a democracy, it's a republic.

www.cnn.com...
National vote tally: 115,409,172

www.cnn.com...
Ohio Bush victory margin: 136,483

If Ohio came in favoring Kerry, he would be the new president-elect. So, the margin of victory/loss is 0.11826% (rounded up to 0.12%) as a ratio of all votes cast on a national scale. (or 2.5% of all votes cast in Ohio)

A very slim margin of victory (or loss). Reviewing the national popular vote is an interesting excercise, but matters not at all for selecting the president.


Fate of a Nation? The world in Ohio’s hand? I’d like to think so, but the real squeaker was in Pennsylvania.

www.cnn.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.cnn.com...
Pennsylvania Kerry margin: 127,472

If Pennsylvania came in favoring Bush, he would have enjoyed a Reaganesque mandate, four years of political blank checks (in terms of political capital). Please note the margin in Pennsylvania was not only smaller, but is significant in the fact that 184,343 more votes were cast in that state, further slimming the Skeptic pucker factor to 0.0011045% (rounded down to 0.11%) as a ratio of all votes cast on a national scale, and 2.3% of all votes cast in Pennsylvania.

Funny, now that my work is complete in Columbus, what fair city looms upon the horizon for our erstwhile simian? You guessed it, the “Steel City”, and with the Steelers doing so well, a “hot” winter looks to be in the offing.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Looks like this will be hitting the mainstream this week, Keith Olberman will be addressing it on Countdown, maybe this isn't over yet:



Here’s an interesting little sidebar of our system of government confirmed recently by the crack Countdown research staff: no Presidential candidate’s concession speech is legally binding. The only determinants of the outcome of election are the reports of the state returns boards and the vote of the Electoral College.




Stories like these have filled the web since the tide turned against John Kerry late Tuesday night. But not until Friday did they begin to spill into the more conventional news media. That’s when the Cincinnati Enquirer reported that officials in Warren County, Ohio, had “locked down” its administration building to prevent anybody from observing the vote count there.

Suspicious enough on the face of it, the decision got more dubious still when County Commissioners confirmed that they were acting on the advice of their Emergency Services Director, Frank Young. Mr. Young had explained that he had been advised by the federal government to implement the measures for the sake of Homeland Security.

Gotcha. Tom Ridge thought Osama Bin Laden was planning to hit Caesar Creek State Park in Waynesville. During the vote count in Lebanon. Or maybe it was Kings Island Amusement Park that had gone Code-Orange without telling anybody. Al-Qaeda had selected Turtlecreek Township for its first foray into a Red State.

The State of Ohio confirms that of all of its 88 Counties, Warren alone decided such Homeland Security measures were necessary. Even in Butler County, reports the Enquirer, the media and others were permitted to watch through a window as ballot-checkers performed their duties. In Warren, the media was finally admitted to the lobby of the administration building, which may have been slightly less incommodious for the reporters, but which still managed to keep them two floors away from the venue of the actual count.

Nobody in Warren County seems to think they’ve done anything wrong. The newspaper quotes County Prosecutor Rachel Hurtzel as saying the Commissioners “were within their rights” to lock the building down, because having photographers or reporters present could have interfered with the count.


www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 07:02 AM
link   
I don't think the Democratic party wants to go down this path. To be honest there were probably voter fraud on both sides. Look at three area's from Cuyahoga county.

REGISTERED VOTERS - OAKWOOD VIL 2746
BALLOTS CAST OAKWOOD VIL 7099

REGISTERED VOTERS - MORELAND HILLS VIL 2990
BALLOTS CAST MORELAND HILLS VIL 4616

REGISTERED VOTERS - MIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS 12713
BALLOTS CAST - MIDDLEBURG HEIGHTS 14854

In the Oakwood Vil area, they had two other issues on the ballots,

ISSUE #62 - OAKWOOD VIL PRO'D ORD (55% for Passage)
Vote for 1 (With 9 of 9 precincts counted)
YES 678 40.67%
NO 989 59.33%

ISSUE #63 - OAKWOOD VIL PRO'D ORDINANCE CONTINUE TO
Vote for 1 (With 9 of 9 precincts counted)
YES 1021 64.91%
NO 552 35.09%

The County Board of Elections at the link gives a breakdown for each ward in Oakwood:

BALLOTS CAST OKWD WD1 364
BALLOTS CAST OKWD WD2 468
BALLOTS CAST OKWD WD3 214
BALLOTS CAST OKWD WD4 303
BALLOTS CAST OKWD WD5 290

adding them == 1639

If you look at the ordinance vote, it would show only about 1700 at the most voted, yet look at the presidential ballots, 7099.

by they way Kerry Carried these there area's.

I really think this is why Kerry conceded so fast. He knew that the Provisional ballots would not take him over the top and that if He challenged the vote, then he stood a good change of having Democratic voter fraud found out. He knew it would not stand up in court.

boe.cuyahogacounty.us...

[edit on 9/11/04 by jrsdls]

[edit on 9/11/04 by jrsdls]



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Good post jrsdls


But, unfortunatly....you're screaming into deaf ears on here.
Apparently only Republicans are capable of fraud. All the extra votes cast in democratic counties and all the irregularities that favored Kerry will be overlooked but any irregularities in Republican counties or any thing that happened that favored Bush and gang will be scrutinized to no end.

Sites like truthout.org are considered legit while anything from foxnews is frowned upon.


Every single US election has had problems in one form or another. Every single one. Fortunatly, just as in this election, they tend to cancel each other out and the winner turns out to be legit. This too will be ignored.


But whatever, all you can do is laugh at all the feeble attempts to create new conspiricies and move on.



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Good post jrsdls


But, unfortunatly....you're screaming into deaf ears on here.
Apparently only Republicans are capable of fraud.


Again, why not investigate and get the facts once and for all? If millions can be spent on checking out the Clintons' land speculating, then much more pertinent to spend a few dimes on something more relevant. If either or both sides are cheating, lets find out. But so far I haven't seen any evidence of the "winning" side wanting to dig into this, but more interested in telling doubters to get over it.

If there is a wide open, partisan and neutral, investigation, and it comes up that the Kerry side cheated, I'll be more than happy to get over it. So lets go! Show us losers how the conservatives represent all of amerika, not just one half



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 11:06 AM
link   
You just don't get it do you. Your own party wants no part of this. I think you are blinded by your hatred of Bush and conservatives and that is causing you to grasp at any straw you can find. The election is over, Bush won. Kerry knows this, McAulffie knows this, Heck, even James Carville knows this, but you and your fellow DUers just don't get it.

You want to hide your head in the sand and say that 59 million Americans are wrong. You want to claim that Ohio or Florida are really Kerry states. They are not.

I think you need to look at the facts and the reality of what you are attempting to do. If your top Democratic leaders want this to go away, then it's because there is a reason.

Don't turn a victory in to a landslide. Democratic voter fraud could change states like NH, WISC, PA, MI, Minnesota, Maine into Red states. Kerry knows this as well as McAulffie.



posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saerlaith
If there is a wide open, partisan and neutral, investigation,


In America? Not likely.


and it comes up that the Kerry side cheated, I'll be more than happy to get over it.


The thing is though, there won't be any investigation on whether the losing side "cheated". Who does that?



So lets go! Show us losers how the conservatives represent all of amerika, not just one half


?
Not sure where you got that someone said conservatives represent all of America.
I can't show that any more than I can show how liberals represent all of America and not just half.

Not seeing the point there...



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 06:26 AM
link   
I found an interesting article, it seems that the Kerry Campaign and the Democratic leadership understand, but the rank and file democrats just don't get it. They lost, pure and simple.


Kerry campaign officials and a range of election-law specialists agree that while machines made errors and long lines in Democratic precincts kept many voters away, there's no realistic chance that Kerry actually beat Bush.

''No one would be more interested than me in finding out that we really won, but that ain't the case," said Jack Corrigan, a veteran Kerry adviser who led the Democrats' team of 3,600 attorneys who fanned out across the country on Election Day to address voting irregularities.

''I get why people are frustrated, but they did not steal this election," Corrigan said. ''There were a few problems here and there in the election. But unlike 2000, there is no doubt that they actually got more votes than we did, and they got them in the states that mattered."


www.boston.com...




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join