Voter fraud - American election vastly corrupted
POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Monday, January 27, 2025 00:47
VIEWED: 29159
PAGE 7 of 16
Quote:
Originally posted by Bojesphob:
Jason, it could have been because they were only using the "electronic voting" machine votes. There are a number of counties that actually used the electronic voting, but by no means a majority. It probably discounted the votes that people cast using the old "hanging chad" ballots.
huh? no? What I am saying is that the exit poll figures in Ohio completely jives with the real tally.
If I get you correctly, what you are saying is that people who voted thru the computers were exitpolled to be overwhelmingly voted for Kerry. Which doesn't jive.
In either case, it leaves the charts suspect if there are these kinds of questions, and we don't have the data to look at it. The charts don't have legends to explain what the scales mean and how they are interpreted. There isn't anything to see what sort of data they used or where it's from. It would be best if I can see the data itself.
As it is, at best, it's suspect and not meaningful at all.
Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
hmmm... which would take us back to hordes of random people with who knows what affiliations touching and retouching the ballots. If not introducing hordes of errors, then same problems with possibilities of fraud.Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Something like an independent group of citizens, perhaps selected at random like jury members, could be in charge of all U.S. elections. There HAS to be a paper trail, and NO electronic voting, ever.
I well remember hordes of older women tending voting booths in Ohio several decades ago. One would not DARE try to cheat with them on guard.
I tend to agree with JasonZZZ here (Goddess help me)... in Canada we have an independant body whos soul purpose is to manage elections - Elections Canada, which is Gov funded but staffed with Civil Servants who have no party influence or Minister bosses. Completely independant of party or corporate influence.
Here: we vote with paper and pen. Then we count them. It's not rocket science.
Of course, there are volenteers from all the parties who watch the voting but thier hands only ever touch a ballot before one takes it into the little booth to vote. After that it's hands off and only Elections Canada people may touch 'em. These votes are kept, locked away, for recounts if needed.
Which is why the fraud in the USA is obvious. And hey, this is the second time an American election was won by fraud. 2000 went to Gore after all.
Civil servants starring as Independant Pollsters. Riiiiiiggghhht. They have no self interest.
As to your election methods, it's just like your vaunted Health Care system, you only have 32 Million citizens. The United States is almost at 300 Million. Not to mention you can't even defend your own shores since your navy is undeployable. So who covers that slack?
As to your CRAZY notion of fraud...you don't think that the Democratic party would be SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER if they even suspected fraud??? You don't think there are thousands of people combing the results? Ha! Even in 2000 the New York Times, The LA Times, and many other left wing papers concluded that their was NO FRAUD! So wake up and move on.
You're simply uninformed...so please stay in Canada...Please, do it for the children.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Exit polling isn't scientific, it depends on someone to ask questions. Proper polling requires consistancy. Exit polling is anything but controlled and consistant.
Furthermore, exit polling was NEVER intended to be used to compare the possible results the DAY OF AN ELECTION. It was supposed to be used AFTER.
However, maybe you're right. Maybe your cute little bar charts are correct....Since the lawyers aren't suing and no recount is in effect, maybe you folks are the only ones who have this priceless secret knowledge! You better share it with the recently deceased Kerry campaign before the CIA shows up and pulls your tin foil hats over your eyes and shove you off the roof.
Please....smarter and more ruthless people than you lot have conceded that it was an old fashioned election with a winner and a loser.
Move on move on.org!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Just keep doing what you're doing. Lying, making absurdly ficticious, baseless stories and mindless propaganda is EXACTLY what helped Kerry lose. The Michael Moore, conspiracy nut case folks are going to have to be hog tied and shut away in a closet before the Dems will EVER challenge for either the White House or any real power in Congress.
First it was the Butterfly ballots, and y'all bitched and moaned till a change was made.
Now it's urban legends about the NEW machines. My god, you folks sound like spoiled brats who don't get their way.
Bush won. Kerry lost.
Get over it. Nobody likes a sore loser.
Sore loser.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
Thank-you! Well said.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I wonder about the difference between the exits and the tallies. If it were truly statistical slop, it would go both ways. There is a BIAS (a type of error) and it still would be good to see it definitively explained. Six separate polling services reported this problem across the nation. They didn't all make the same mistakes or end up under the same weird measuring regime. The isolated expl'n here or there isn't enough for me. I'd really like to see this studied.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I wonder about the difference between the exits and the tallies. If it were truly statistical slop, it would go both ways. There is a BIAS (a type of error) and it still would be good to see it definitively explained. Six separate polling services reported this problem across the nation. They didn't all make the same mistakes or end up under the same weird measuring regime. The isolated expl'n here or there isn't enough for me. I'd really like to see this studied.
I just want to point out that if the Kerry camp thought for one split second that they were robbed, they would have deployed the lawyers and forced an investigation.
Remember the VoterNewsService in 2000? They got it wrong too. Very much so. Was that due to scandle?
Exit polling was never intended for this. It was to be used AFTER an election to gauge who cast votes for what. I for one think exit polling should be illegal. Let the people vote and we'll find out with in a few hours.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The news services as I understand it all get their exit poll data from the same polling source, so as to be on equal ground. This polling service is actually paid by the networks combined to provide that service. Unfortunately, there were a number of issues that arose due to when the polls were taken and the demographics of the folks being polled.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
^^^ Thanks for bringing some info Connerflynn.
Exit Polls are just that, polls. If there is a demographic discrepincy it should be notable before the polling. If that's true it's a stupid mistake.
When there are reports of foul play it's the job of the media to report it. But more importantly, it's the job of the Government to assure the public thier country isn't being run by a bunch of lieing chimpanzees.
There are lot's of reports of fraud and where there is smoke...
Still the American government has not acknowledged there is even any problem (sort of like when GWB was asked if he ever made a mistake in his last 4 years... he insisted he did not!) as if the American system of one vote for every person is intact.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
Vote Fraud 2004 Round Up
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_crime&Number=
293078189
Broward Machines Count Backwards
Excerpt (Palm Beach Post): Why a voting system would be designed to count backward was a mystery to Broward County Mayor Ilene Lieberman. She was on the phone late Wednesday with Omaha-based Elections Systems and Software. ... Late Thursday, ES&S issued a statement reiterating that it learned of the problems in 2002 and said the software upgrades would be submitted to Hood's office next year. The company was working with the counties it serves to make sure ballots don't exceed capacity and said no other counties reported similar problems. ...
In one precinct, Bush’s tally was supersized by a computer glitch
Excerpt (Columbus Dispatch): A computer error involving one voting-machine cartridge gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in a Gahanna precinct.
Franklin County’s unofficial results gave Bush 4,258 votes to Democratic challenger John Kerry’s 260 votes in Precinct 1B, which votes at New Life Church on Stygler Road. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. ... Damschroder said he received some calls yesterday from people who saw the error when reading the list of poll results on the election board’s Web site.
Glitches Mar San Francisco Balloting
Excerpt (NY Times): SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 4 - San Francisco's new municipal election system, which relies on an optical scan machine and software that ranks the voters' choice of candidate, failed to work as expected because of a software problem, officials said on Thursday.
The city's election department learned of the problem on Wednesday, when the maker of the new software, ES&S, alerted the authorities that the software "didn't tabulate and combine the data as it was supposed to," one election official said. Because of the problem, candidates were not ranked.
Sender, Berl & Sons
Excerpt: THE REPUBLICANS ON CABLE ARE CROWING ABOUT THEIR WIN. THIS DISGUSTS US. THEY DIDN'T WIN. THEY LOST LIKE THE REST OF US. THEY LOST THIS COUNTRY, OUR RIGHT TO VOTE, OUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE OUR LEADERS AND OUR POLICIES. IF BEING OCCUPIED AND CONTROLLED IS THEIR IDEA OF DEMOCRACY AND AMERICA, THEY CAN JOIN TOMMY FRANKS WHO DARED DECLARE THAT DEMOCRACY HAS BEEN A NOBLE EXPERIMENT (IMPLYING WHOSE TIME HAS COME AND GONE).
Comment: I can't add much to the above. Feel free to discount them if you will but SenderBerl has a Blue Chip record of calling World Events Correctly. Lots of other interesting data and analysis on this site as well.
Some observations of the 2004 election.
Excerpt: Examining the results of this election reveals some striking details that should make everyone who opposed Bush very concerned. In 2000 Al Gore received 51.00 million votes, in 2004 Kerry only received 55.7 million. The 2.5 million Nader voters who left him did not simply evaporate. Nader supporters are intelligent progressives who oppose corporate rule and the two-party system, but knowing the stakes this time around, it was very predictable they would abandon him. This 2.5 million went to John Kerry. Exit polls show that Kerry also picked up a small 1 in 10 fraction of 2000 Bush
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This is just a terrific post from a clear minded person. RUE, you're the shabazz.
rue wrote:
Thursday, November 04, 2004 17:25
I'm still curious about what may come out of this.
In 2000 when the news orgs 'called' Florida for Gore (based on exit polls) and the vote very publicly didn't go that way, it couldn't be swept under the rug. So the news orgs got together, went over their polls and data during the next couple of days, and decided that they hadn't actually made any mistakes. It was the discrepancy itself between the exits and the votes that uncovered the problems with the voting. Thousands more people in Florida thought they had voted for Gore. (Somewhere on my computer is the actual data from the study commissioned by the consortium, but that link doesn't work anymore. However, I did find a link to a news article: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html
"According to the study, 5,277 voters made a clean punch for Gore and a clean punch for Reform Party nominee Pat Buchanan. An additional 1,650 voters made clean punches for Bush and Buchanan. ... a CNN analysis found that Gore could have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush. Eighteen other counties used another confusing ballot design. .... Gore would have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush.)
This time around even the pollsters like Zogby, who were trying to be technically cautious, got blind-sided. The exit-poll v tally discrepancy was not so public this time around, but it was still a problem. Will it be pursued to ultimately determine the cause as was done in 2000?
I suspect the pollsters, whose job IS doing polls, will have an avid financial interest in exonerating (or quietly fixing) the business. But whether they have the clout and money to pursue the issue is another matter.
Have exits become unreliable? Were there other problems? I'm interested in finding out the ultimate answer. The problem is that even if the answers are pursued, they might not be in the public arena.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
The news services as I understand it all get their exit poll data from the same polling source.
There were independent pollsters doing their own polling, who were not part of the news service exit poll system. They were also not part of the private polling by Republicans and Democrats. I'd have to go find the article to get the list, but Zogby was one of them.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME