The Boston Globe has just published a major story on election problems across the country. (Here in Los Angeles, the LAT seems to be hoping that the issue will just go away. Hardly!) The piece references Bev Harris but does not mention the fraudulent poll tapes that election officials tried to palm off on her. For some reason, the media don't want to touch that story, even to debunk it -- I've heard that CNN refused to point their cameras at the evidence.
Protests: Marchers are going to protest the media blackout of the election fraud story on Friday, December 3, in Los Angeles. The protest will take place between 3:30 PM - 6PM in front of KCBS-TV/KNX News at 6121 Sunset Blvd. For further info, contact Jeanine Tater at jtater@socal.rr.com.
Black armbands are requested. (But since I tend to wear black anyways, how will anyone tell?)
The next day, on December 4, Democrats and others will rally for a recount in Columbus, Ohio.
Work permitting, I'll try to be at the L.A. event. Normally, I am not enthusiastic about marches and protest rallies. However, if current protests attract sufficient numbers, they will serve the function of announcing that the vote fraud issue is not restricted to a small band of internet "conspiracy buffs."
Incidentally, I note that the first and foremost charge of the Ohio rally-organizers concerns the extra 3,893 that went to Bush in a Franklin County precinct. Disingenuous would-be debunkers have tried to explain this anomaly as a mere "software error." But we now know of many such "errors" across Ohio and across the country. We have, for example, the largely African-American precincts where a right-wing third-party candidates did ridiculously well, while Bush pulled roughly the same numbers as in 2000.
Since nearly every one of the reported "errors" across the country favored Bush, we may safely conclude that these events were about as "erroneous" as a punch in the face.
More on Ohio:
A little-known but cleverly-named blog called Newsclip Autopsy has analyzed the media's treatment of the Ohio recount, and found numerous errors. The papers kept saying that the Greens and Libertarians were in the process of raising the money well after the goal was reached.
The fact that Blackwell is dragging out the counting of the provisionals in order to prevent a proper recount is, in and of itself, proof that all is not well in Ohio.
The Kerry campaign has filed a brief in Delaware county to overturn that judge's ruling against the Green recount. Let's have a moratorium on wails over the "silence of Kerry" -- he will function well as a legal force as long he stays quiet. The moment he says "I wuz robbed," the media buzzsaw will turn him into the most hated man in America.
Incidentally, MoveOn is asking for volunteers to help with the Ohio recount.
I neglected to link to this interesting interview with Keith Olbermann, who had some interesting things to say about the Warren county lockdown:
On the "Thursday or Friday after the election," someone sent Olbermann a link to an article about a "lockdown" in effect on election night at the Warren County, Ohio courthouse because of a "terrorist threat." "It struck me on the face of it as the most ridiculous thing I had ever heard," Olbermann said.I disagree with Olbermann. Right-wing media will overpower any public outcry against congressmen who support Bush.
After seeing countless other reports of minor voting inaccuracies, Olbermann was stunned.
"Suddenly it was clear to me that there were a large number of stories suggesting widespread voting irregularities," he said....
What would happen if the Ohio result were overturned? "It's all political science fiction at this point. If something is found in Ohio, and Ohio is found to go for Kerry, it would be fascinating to see what the Republicans would do," he said.
He said that the Republicans in Congress would have to make a choice about whether to support the President, or risk their own seat in Congress due to recall or impeachment. They would have to decide whether they would go down with the president or save themselves. "We have proved time and time again that self-interest will trump party interests. This could become a non-partisan issue," Olbermann said.
Incidentally, Warren county is one of the counties where an unknown, unfunded African-American woman named Connally, running for a seat on the Ohio Supreme Court, got larger numbers than John Kerry. Hmm...is it not usually the case that a large number of people vote for president and leave the rest of the ballot blank?
For more info on Warren County, see this page belonging to Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
No independent persons were allowed to observe the vote count. Here the turnout increased by 33.55%, the second highest percentage of any county in the state. Gore received 27.71% last time, and Kerry 27.53% this time. Remarkable. Bush's victory margin rose from 29,176 votes last time to 41,124 votes this time.There was a recount, of sorts, in Warren county, which gave Bush similar numbers, even though 2,164 votes showed up out of nowhere. (There were only 1,465 provisional ballots issued.) But since a lockdown "for security reasons" kept observers out of this recount -- Osama and the gang really seem to have it in for Warren County, eh wot? -- we have little reason to place much stock in the revised numbers.
Incidentally, the counting of the provisionals has decreased Bush's margin of victory in Ohio by some 5,500 votes, according to the Ohio Vote Suppression site. I've seen differing figures, but right now, these look trustworthy. The site also has some good insights into leading Ohio Democrat Bill Anthony and his reaction (or lack thereof) to election irregularities.
New Mexico and Nevada: As noted earlier, the Greens and Libertarians are asking for a recount in these states as well. Both have coughed up their share of anomaly stories -- for example, in areas of New Mexico populated largely by Native Americans, Republicans proved weirdly attractive this year.
The bad news: The cost of a recount in Nevada may reach $500,000.
The other bad news: Supposedly, Nevada combines paper receipts with the e-vote. But with many machines, alas, that just was not the case.
The good news: Daniel Burk -- Washoe County's registrar of voters -- assures all that the tallies have "honesty and integrity." So that should set our minds to rest.
New Hampshire: As many know by now, Ralph Nader's recount in this state largely reaffirmed the official tallies. Kerry won, but not by much, and the exit poll discrepancy was sizable. (11% in NH as opposed to 6% in Ohio.) This fact has caused much gnashing of teeth on the Democratic Underground site, although I am less worried than others are.
The recount included a mere 11 precincts, and the results cannot be extrapolated to all other percincts, let alone all other states. I still have yet to determine how the recount proceeded, who did the counting, what was recounted in those locations, or how these results invalidate the thesis of central tabulator rigging. New Hampshire uses paper trails, but these are taken to include Diebold optical scan ballots, and we cannot be sure of the chain of custody. The tiny size of the recount, and the length of time involved, makes old-fashioned ballot-stuffing very possible.
Compare New Hampshire to Warren county, Ohio, where -- as noted above -- a "lockdown" recount largely recapitulated the official tallies but did not make objective viewers feel secure about the results.
And if you scoff at the likelihood of old-fashioned ballot-box stuffing, note that James Tobin, the Bush campaign chair in New England, has just been indicted for conspiracy to commit election-related abuses. How can anyone ask us to trust crooks?
Speaking of crooks -- I remain skeptical of Nader, who, in 1972, refused to run as a third-party candidate because he did not want to upset the chances for a Democratic win. Since that time, a former Nader associate has told reporters that Nader -- an affluent man -- has cheated on his taxes and has committed numerous financial irregularities. Obviously, a man in that position makes himself open to manipulation. Having twice helped Bush win office, I suspect that his new job was to "ratify" a corrupt vote via this New Hampshire business.
It is said that he asked for a recount in this state after a request by Democratic party activists. But the same activists begged him not to run in 2004. He hasn't cared about Democratic opinion heretofore -- so why did his mind become open on the subject of New Hampshire? Odd!
Exit polls: As anyone might have predicted, the conservatives are mounting answers to the academic studies indicating concern over the pattern of disparities. I'll have much more to say on this later. Right now, I can briefly say that the links have sent me to right-wing wacko sites -- including one where the moderator seems to believe that the Democrats (yes, the Democrats!) cheated in 2000. Nuts who think that way should be classified alongside Holocaust deniers; they are unworthy of debate.
Others seem to stake their argument on the old standby: "Exit polls are not accurate (except in the Ukraine when conducted by CIA-funded institutes)." Demand that these people address the pattern of inaccuracy (i.e., "Why do errors always undervalue the Republican vote?"), and you'll get a response worthy of Mike Myers' old character "Dieter": "Your qvestions have become tiresome. Now iss ze time on Shprockets ven ve dance!"
9 comments:
Just a couple corrections from today, when you mention the huge voter increase in Warren County over 2000. You have to control for change in population. Warren is a suburban county that is booming. It gained 21,000 people from 2000 to 2003 based on census estimates, an annual average gain of over 4%. Controlling for population gain, Warren's turnout increased by 16% over 2000. Still high but not unreasonable. The extra votes in most counties are coming from both provisional ballots as well as late absentee ballots, so that is probably the reason for the extra votes. That happened in a lot of counties. But it still doesn't explain the decrease in number of registered voters.
The highest turnout increase (controlling for pop change) was Pickaway County at 29%, which I think is suspiciously high. By the way, the same issue occurs with Delaware County now in the (alternative) news. It had a voter turnout gain of 43%. Suspicious at first, but most of that is population gain - estimated to be 25% over the four years, so the real gain in turnout was 18%.
Of the large counties, Franklin (Columbus) increased the most in real turnout: 22%. Given that Franklin had by far the highest registered voters per precinct (1073) and the long lines forced many to go home, I think the large turnout increase is suspicious. Another clue - the number of registered voters is 108% of the estimated number of eligible voters (based on census numbers). Obviously they are not up to date purging folks who have passed away or moved. But this leaves the system open to fraud - hey, I used to live in Chicago!
Oh, the Connally vote differentials seem pretty easy to explain. The races for judge / Supreme Court in Ohio are non-partisan. Although Connally is a Democrat, on the ballot she is not listed as a Democrat and her opponent is not listed as a Republican. Therefore a lot of voters didn't know who the heck they were voting for in that race - I know I sometimes don't know about all the judge races on the ballot. So a lot of folks voted for Bush but then did eeny-meany-miney-moe on the judge race or picked her because she was a woman or whatever. In a lot of these counties both judge candidates had between 45 and 55% of the vote, indicating a high degree of random selection. In Butler County, another county where Connally got a lot more votes than Kerry, Kerry had more votes than Connally in almost all the Democratic precincts - so Dems also didn't know who they were voting for in the judge race, but then Connally had more votes than Kerry in the Republican precincts. Even in Cuyahoga, where Connally is from, she only got 59% of the vote, much less than Kerry.
Tim Lohrentz
I appreciate many of the points Tim has made, but I am not at all sure about the Connally matter. I'm under the impression that most people, when confronted with unfamiliar names in a judgeship race, simply don't vote in that race (as opposed to the ennie-meeny-miney-moe method). I paid attention to one such race many year ago here in CA -- and while my memory is vague, I recall that the judge received less than a quarter of the votes cast in the presidential race.
hey! lay off ralph! he's a hero, and the reason millions of people who could have didn't die in cars, from pollution, bad medicine, and many other things. just because the vastly-funded democratic party tells lies about him, doesn't mean they're not lies! people like him always have corrupt people like kerry and general motors trying to slander them and make them look bad. the reason he's still going strong and being supported by so many intelligent people is because he's clean, free of corruption, and above recrimination.
and he didn't cost anybody any election! gore lost my vote and many others, and kerry had no prayer of ever getting it! he didn't EARN it! if gore had been in and 9/11 had occurred, we would be bombing south america instead of iraq, because that's where his oil interests lie! you don't listen no matter how many different and simplistic ways ralph explains how his reputation as a spoiler is bullshit! too many people don't. you may have some smarts, but you aren't as intelligent, or else as open-minded, as you think. you get this idea in your head and won't listen to reason. and i'm sick of people scapegoating ralph nader!
KERRY VOTED FOR THE IRAQ WAR, OPPOSES GAY MARRIAGE, IS ABOMINABLE ON THE ENVIRONMENT (search: Plan Columbia, his baby), VOTED FOR THE PATRIOT ACT, TOOK MILLIONS IN CORPORATE DOLLARS FROM THE VERY CORPORATIONS HE "PROMISED" TO PROTECT US FROM, REFUSED TO FIGHT FOR HEALTH CARE FOR EVERYONE, AND IS A BROTHER-MEMBER OF SKULL AND BONES, JUST LIKE W! He had no idea how to win an election of real people with real problems, and running against the worst president in history. knowing fraud had been planned on many levels, he conceded to his brother before every vote--that he PROMISED would be counted--was counted! and gore earlier this year admittted he made a mistake not fighting bush over florida, because he knew he'd won that election (as the NYT quietly announced 12 sept 2001!) and just LET bush steal the white house. and so did we! but yeah, i can see how that is ALL ralph's fault!
i like most of what you say, but lay the fuck off ralph when you don't even know what you're talking about! if he cheated on his taxes, and YOU knew it, do you really think he wouldn't be in jail??? try reading up on what he's ACTUALLY done for all of us, and also read up on all kerry has done against life! ralph is trying to break the corporate-owned duopoly, not keep assholes like w in office. i vote my concience, and any vote of mine for president is for whom i trust, not to keep out someone i fear. you want my vote? you better be prepared to earn it! kerry didn't try for one second. i will never, NEVER, vote for war!
peace,
naderite rainwoman
http://votenader.org/media_press/index.php?cid=413
In the eleven wards recounted, only very minor discrepancies were found between the optical scan machine counts of the ballots and the recount. The discrepancies are similar to those found when hand-counted ballots are recounted.
No conclusions can be drawn about the reliability of electronic voting machines on the basis of the New Hampshire recount, because the machines used in the 11 selected wards predate those showing irregularities in Ohio and other states, where votes were counted backward on some machines and votes were assigned to the wrong candidate on others. Secretary of State William Gardner reported that the machines used in New Hampshire also predate the Diebold Corporation’s purchase of the company that manufactured them. However, the case reinforces the Nader-Camejo call for a voter verified paper ballot trail for random audits and independent recounts to confirm the accuracy of questionable results.
“It would not have been possible to satisfy voter concerns about the fairness of the election in these wards without the paper trail New Hampshire has kept in place,” said Amy Belanger, coordinator of the Nader-Camejo recount effort. “Given the vulnerability of electronic voting machines to tampering, hacking or simple malfunctions, a paper trail is essential to the integrity of our democratic system.”
So that answers your statement: "The recount included a mere 11 precincts, and the results cannot be extrapolated to all other percincts, let alone all other states. I still have yet to determine how the recount proceeded, who did the counting, what was recounted in those locations, or how these results invalidate the thesis of central tabulator rigging."
They bought their tabulators before the buttheads who promised the election to bush had a chance to eliminate the paper trail. see, you're so set believing ralph nader is what kerry's libelous propaganda claimed (scapegoated) that you won't even go to ralph's site and read what he has to say. afraid he might make sense and you have to look for real responsibility instead of scapegoating ralph like the dems? i mean, even after all the dems put him through, and all of you at their request, he's still fighting for justice, and helping get kerry into the office for which he was favoured by the less intelligent majority of american voters who believe what they're told instead of reading and researching and standing by their beliefs.
i mean, many kerry supporters were against the war, but supported him with all their energy (and dollars) even though he voted for it knowing damned well bush was lying about why he was bombing the iraqis! and most people i know who voted for him knew how wrong the war was and that he voted for it, but were still behind him, or so terrified of bush they couldn't think straight. some of these people now regret that, realising that voting their conscience would have been a better use of their votes. i'm so glad i have no regrets about my part in the election.
peace again!
"You are making the typical leftist error of imagining yourself the arbiter of all moral issues." So pomaroo, you would bother to enter into a pointless argument with a holocaust denier, flat earth-ers, the-earth-is-7-thousand-year-older-ers, that 'naderite rainwoman', etc? Chomsky is not a holocaust denier, but he does rightly state that in a supposedly free and open society they do (unfortunately) have the right to voice their opinion, just as you or I have the right to verbally rebuke them - if we felt like wasting our time on scum - with the mountains of evidence that it did happen.
as for naderite rainwoman, either severely misinformed (but that would go against the character the person is attempting to portray) or a troll, perhapes another in the grip of the seething rage of the enfranchished? or just pom being an arse? I'd present some fancy numbers saying it is him, but he'd rebuke them with circular logic and calling us all sorts of variations on the world Liberal. speaking of Liberals, if the American media truely were violently Liberal, as many in the US of A seem to claim... then wouldn't they infact be rabidly running with the story?
Kerry did not vote for the Iraq War. He voted for the President to have the authority to decide whether or not to initiate the war. Kerry also voted to provide funding for the troops once the President had already set the course. I disagree with Kerry's decision to vote to give the President the authority for the war.
However, it is simply incorrect to say that Kerry voted for the War. Kerry's position was always the same - the President should have the authority to decide about the war. Later, as a presidential candidate, Kerry criticized the particular way Bush used his presidential authority. That is completely appropriate, and in no way is it a flip-flop.
I believe the President should have the authority to veto legislation (as the Constitution says). Does this mean I support the President's decision to veto any particular piece of legislation? No. Apparently many on the Left and Right have been unable to grasp this very straightforward distinction. That is unfortunate.
It is also unfortunate that anyone continues to support Ralph Nader, who dishonestly portrays the two major parties as virtually identical. It was obvious to anyone paying even the slightest shred of attention that the two parties were quite different, even if you felt (as I did) that both were inadequate. Ralph Nader has lost almost all claim to respect.
Pomeroo:
You are correct to chastise those on the Left who make unsubstantiated allegations of vote fraud. However, this misses the point of the vote fraud issue.
The real issue is that we need an electoral system that GUARANTEES every vote will be counted, or at the very least that vote tallies cannot be manipulated. The current electronic systems that use non-open source code and lack paper ballots cannot give us that guarantee. The burden of proof should not be on activists to prove that fraud occurred. The burden of proof should be on our government to prove that the voting system is NOT vulnerable to fraud. This should be the absolute first priority in a democracy - or else we will not have a democracy much longer.
Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!
I have a extra income online site. It pretty much covers ##KEYWORD## related stuff.
Come and check it out if you get time :-)
Nice blog. Please check out my based business classifieds free home
site. It is all about based business classifieds free home
informations.
Post a Comment