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.

 

Bush stole the election- I'm doing something about it

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by farhyde

I am all for Civil War, I think we need it. It may be nice to pop a couple rounds into a few Babtists...

just a joke.. realy.


HAHAHAHA

Just keep in mind that the whiney losing liberals that want to start the Civil War are also the ones toting gun control...the ones you want to fight are the ones with all the guns...


FYI: I am fairly well armed myself....so BRING IT ON!

...and I have a concealed weapons carrying permit and just may be packing iron right now...you just never know do you?





posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 07:58 AM
link   

as mentioned by HarmoniusOne
If "Americans love this guy" then why do so many of them "think the election was rigged"??? That's what doesn't make sense.


No, sorry, what doesn't make sense is when people make 'blanket' assertions and do not back them with sources providing numbers indicating just how many "think this particular election being rigged".
Please define "so many" in relation to the election being "rigged"...?

Oh, btw, wasn't the 2000 elections supposedly "rigged" also?



seekerof

[edit on 17-11-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thinker
American polictics is controled. The polls are false. they show them on television so people can believe that bush has 50% of support. But the reality bush could only have 25% of support, then rig the elections adding 28% more votes for bush and he win's.

Since everyone really believes that elections can't be rigged in america. This just makes it easier to do, because nobody will ever expect it in a nation like america.



Exactly. There's no way in hell Bush could've won that election (fairly). Just no way. The numbers don't add up. Besides that, we all saw the HUGE numbers of people who turned out. The majority of newly registered voters were going for Kerry. Their numbers just vanished - according to the rigged machines. With no paper trail. Owned and programmed by Republican donors to Bush.

It's ridiculous. Democracy is dead, people. Your vote doesn't mean shyte in Bushworld.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Just exactly what are u basing your assumption on??....They rigged the election???...HOW??....


Everywhere the Diebold machines were used, Bush got an extra +5% of the vote, through the miracle of modern technology, and the cooperation of Diebold.

Where the Diebold machines were NOT used, the votes matched the exit polls....whether for Kerry or Bush.

Where the Diebold machines WERE used, the votes were +5% for Bush when compared to the exit polls.

This isn't about which candidate won or lost. This is about a much more important issue....the fact that we no longer are in control of our nation...and that our election system is a facade.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid


Exactly. There's no way in hell Bush could've won that election (fairly). Just no way. The numbers don't add up. Besides that, we all saw the HUGE numbers of people who turned out. The majority of newly registered voters were going for Kerry. Their numbers just vanished - according to the rigged machines.


Well, soon after that wonderful election day (
), that little bald guy on CNN (a typical liberal news organization) talked about the statistics of the election. Mind you, he is presumably a Kerry supporting liberal. He said that in the 2000 election, about 17% of the voters were, I forget the exact age range, but is was something like under 25 years of age. And this year, after all the hype and free "get out the vote" and "vote or die" concerts and promotions specifically targeted to the young voters...guess what percentage of voters there were from that same age group?

Times up...... 17%!

He even said, "I guess those young people just wanted free concerts and tee shirts but didn't care enough to actually go vote."

I thought that was hilarious!


kix

posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Imho An election is NOT an election when:

People can vote twice
People vote but leave no paper or document trail.
The electoral college is completelly autonomous and with federal funding so no one can tamper $$$$ with it.
The Counting of votes must be counted BY regular citizens chossen randomly by the electoral college and trained.
All citizens must identify themselves with a OFICILA electoral ID with photo and fingerprint and signature.
all electoral sites MUST have a representative of each Party and a random citizen as arbiter.

If a setback or a problem arises due to natural disaster, violence or else the booth can be closed and opened when the police or public force arrives.

When that happens in the US, then you can say that the election was not tampered with.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by leiphasw

Well, soon after that wonderful election day (
), that little bald guy on CNN (a typical liberal news organization) talked about the statistics of the election. Mind you, he is presumably a Kerry supporting liberal. He said that in the 2000 election, about 17% of the voters were, I forget the exact age range, but is was something like under 25 years of age. And this year, after all the hype and free "get out the vote" and "vote or die" concerts and promotions specifically targeted to the young voters...guess what percentage of voters there were from that same age group?

Times up...... 17%!

He even said, "I guess those young people just wanted free concerts and tee shirts but didn't care enough to actually go vote."

I thought that was hilarious!


That little bald guy on CNN is probably a Republican spy like Zell Miller. Also note that CNN is part of the Mass Media Brainwashing...The American corporate mass media will spit out numbers that has no backing. That 17% doesn't make sense really......Young adult turnout was UP more than 9% higher than the 2000 election. The real percentages will probably never be known, Im guessing the 17% is because of the turnout increased among other age groups.

But of course this all comes from the Census Bureau who is a division of the US Department of Commerce. The Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans came to the Bush administration from the oil industry in 2001.
Census Bureau roots to the Republican party is deep.


For you to find the percentages hilarious in your above statement just shows us how brainwashed people really are.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Everywhere the Diebold machines were used, Bush got an extra +5% of the vote, through the miracle of modern technology, and the cooperation of Diebold.

Where the Diebold machines were NOT used, the votes matched the exit polls....whether for Kerry or Bush.

Where the Diebold machines WERE used, the votes were +5% for Bush when compared to the exit polls.

The state of Maryland voted entirely on electronic voting machines. Kerry won Maryland by 13%.

Now what does that tell us?

from ECK
Besides that, we all saw the HUGE numbers of people who turned out. The majority of newly registered voters were going for Kerry.

(a)Yes the turnout was huge.
(b)Yes the majority of newly registered voters were Democratic.
The problem for Kerry was that group (b) didn't vote. The young, newly registered didn't show up to vote. This is not unusual; the youth vote is typically unreliable.

Bush voters turned out in large, commanding numbers. 3.5 million more, to be exact.




posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   
It also tells us that Gazrok and ECK must be standup comics.

There were no Diebold Machines in my county, and it went 78% for Bush.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
The young, newly registered didn't show up to vote. This is not unusual; the youth vote is typically unreliable.



If you go by Circle, they did show up and vote
.
Researchers at the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement at the University of Maryland found that 18- to 29-year-old turnout was up by 4.6 million voters from exit poll data from the 2000 election.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPhiles

Originally posted by jsobecky
The young, newly registered didn't show up to vote. This is not unusual; the youth vote is typically unreliable.



If you go by Circle, they did show up and vote
.
Researchers at the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement at the University of Maryland found that 18- to 29-year-old turnout was up by 4.6 million voters from exit poll data from the 2000 election.


That number goes up only if you include 25-29 yr olds it should be 19-24 those are youth voters and the numbers didnt go up at all in that age braket. But you tack on 25-29 and yes the numbers went up.

25-29 are not really youth or new voters though



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

That number goes up only if you include 25-29 yr olds it should be 19-24 those are youth voters and the numbers didnt go up at all in that age braket. But you tack on 25-29 and yes the numbers went up.

25-29 are not really youth or new voters though


The numbers still go up with 18-24 year old's
www.civicyouth.org...

CIRCLE releases a Fact Sheet showing that the turnout rate of 18-24 year old voters rose by 5.8 percentage points, as 1.8 million more people in this age group voted than in 2000.

And I do believe Circle get most of the info from the Census Bureau .
who is a division of the US Department of Commerce. The Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans came to the Bush administration from the oil industry in 2001.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 01:31 PM
link   
this data was generated from so-called exit polls...not the actual votes.

I've voted many times and have never submitted to an exit poll.

its none of anyone's business who I vote for.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Ah so it only goes up 1.8 million compared to 4.6 million when you tack on the 24-29 year olds. Hardly the break through year people had been hoping for the youth vote. We had increase voter turnout overall so I guess some of that would translate to youth voters. But it appears the percent of the electorate remained the same.

First-time voters made up about 10 percent of the electorate, about the same as in 2000. The vote remains un-rocked

www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 02:42 PM
link   
It cant be really compared to the 2000 election because exit polls are never right. Bogus exit polls can be a tool of deception. Exit polls where wrong at the start of the election and are probably still wrong there after. Don't be fooled into these percentage numbers. The truth will never be known. Its only there to brainwash you.

Go and put that on your dollar bill



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 07:13 PM
link   


The state of Maryland voted entirely on electronic voting machines. Kerry won Maryland by 13%.


Somehow exit poll predictions did not tally with final vote counts in 'Battle Ground States' ONLY, like Ohio! Hmmmm. Exit poll results were consistent with final vote counts in non- Battle Ground States. The early exit poll numbers consistently showed Kerry winning in both Florida and Ohio .

Maryland was not a 'battle ground state' and was expected to fall easily into the Kerry camp; so a Bush cheat there would only have raised red flags. It would be like Kerry winning Texas!


Did Karl Rove somehow fix the 'electronic machines' ? There's no way to know. Remember, 30% of Americans voted electronically in 2004, and most of these machnies furnish NO paper trail!...... ....


I hate conspiracy theories, but I'm tempted.





[edit on 18-11-2004 by Logician]



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 01:14 AM
link   
How in the world did the topic go from Bush stealing the election to coc aine on dollar bills....in the same paragraph?



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 03:18 AM
link   
With no paper trail, who will ever know the election was stolen or not?
Only the people who stole it, if they did.

If you have a paper reciept that prints with your electronic vote you put it in a box. Statistical sampling is done from the paper reciepts to see if it statistically matches the electronic results. If they match it is probably all kosher. If they don't you do a count of the paper and take that result.

Pure electronic voting done on Diebolds machines [who are a biased corporation] can never be trusted.
.



posted on Nov, 18 2004 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by sigung86
I must be a mildly conservative radical... I don't necessarily like the fact that Bush is back again, but he is there and is the President. What bothers me is the number of people who are advocating a civil war and popping a few "babtists" (perhaps Baptists?) ...
.

Baptists.. yeah that's the Ticket... it looked wrong when I spelled it. Anyway I was just being funny (in a " I really crack myself up" sort of way. )

I really don't know if the election was rigged, but these machines WERE made weak. The whole thing is real shady... How do you find something like this as totally unbelievable? It is a hell of alot more feasible than most of the stuff I read on here... i.e. Alien Landings, earth wobbling ,time traveling ATS members.. etc. Yes reptiles live in a cave at a secret base, but yet an election can't be rigged.. Elections have been rigged since the very first election.

When I mentioned civil war, I was thinking I was in another thread that I was just looking at. A civil war may be a good way to actually get out heads out of our ases for a bit.. and as far as being shot at in anger- we should all be shot once, I really think that this would be good for us. I got stabbed in the back with a broken pipe once and it changed my life for the better. I no longer worry about silly things like Flag burning, prayer in schools and Monday Night Football Commercials.

Speaking of this Monday night football commercial situation... this is proof enough we need a civil war.- we just don't have enough to worry about
obviously. A couple roof top snipers will clear these problems up.


Good Night and God Bless

Magnums of Love,
Farhyde




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join