Questioning the 2004 Election

[La Flames Fan]

Well I've just spent an enormous amount of time reading this very interesting article in ROLLING STONE by Robert Kennedy Jr.

I'm too tired to comment myself, but it is a fascinating article to say the least.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...lection_stolen

[troutman]

Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted -- enough to have put John Kerry in the White House. BY ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.



But what is most anomalous about the irregularities in 2004 was their decidedly partisan bent: Almost without exception they hurt John Kerry and benefited George Bush. After carefully examining the evidence, I've become convinced that the president's party mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people in 2004.

[Bingo]

I can't believe it took someone in the US almost two years to find a conspiracy in this one.

They can't have a single event in that country without some puppet strings in the background.

sigh ...

It's crazy ... but sometimes when two parties go the voters, one of them doesn't win.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Let's, for the sake of argument, just grant all of Kennedy's theories/accusations are true. Do you really think that the democrats didn't do the exact same things in areas that they had similar control of situations?

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. most certainly isn't going to mention that possibility or investigate incidences that go the other way.

If you believe this kind of thing occurs on this level it is naive and foolhardy to think that it doesn't happen in both parties.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I can't believe it took someone in the US almost two years to find a conspiracy in this one.

They can't have a single event in that country without some puppet strings in the background.

sigh ...

It's crazy ... but sometimes when two parties go the voters, one of them doesn't win.

No kidding. If something doesn't go in your favour, start a conspiracy theory about how the other side cheated. The election is over and done with.

Good time to bring it up though.

[Bobblehead]

The election is long over. Forget the conspiracy theory.

But perhaps there are issues raised in the article that should be looked at. Things like the different ways each electoral district ran the election. Paper ballots in some places, computers in others, differing methods of registration, butterfly ballots, etc.

Our Canadian method seems simple, but it also seems to work very well - results are available in most areas very quickly.

While the 'conspiracy' focus of the article is too late to do anything other than create division, some of the issues may be valid.

[Igottago]

If something did happen, people need to know about it. I don't think its a matter of saying "well its over now, forget it"..our American neighbours are supposed to be the poster boy for democracy. There is no harm in investigating it. And with the regime in charge right now, I wouldn't put it past them.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

The election is long over. Forget the conspiracy theory.

But perhaps there are issues raised in the article that should be looked at. Things like the different ways each electoral district ran the election. Paper ballots in some places, computers in others, differing methods of registration, butterfly ballots, etc.

Our Canadian method seems simple, but it also seems to work very well - results are available in most areas very quickly.

While the 'conspiracy' focus of the article is too late to do anything other than create division, some of the issues may be valid.

Fair enough changes may need to be made but it would be much easier to get that point across and have people listen if he didn't focus on his all too familiar "dems got screwed" (not sure if they ever have lost an election other than by fraud).

In typical democrat fashion he can't resist taking a cheap shot at the Republican presidency and therefore marginalises the effectiveness of his message.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

The election is long over. Forget the conspiracy theory.

But perhaps there are issues raised in the article that should be looked at. Things like the different ways each electoral district ran the election. Paper ballots in some places, computers in others, differing methods of registration, butterfly ballots, etc.

Our Canadian method seems simple, but it also seems to work very well - results are available in most areas very quickly.

While the 'conspiracy' focus of the article is too late to do anything other than create division, some of the issues may be valid.

Definitely. Anyone who has voted in an American election would probably tell you that the system in place is irregular and antiquated.

[Cowperson]

''We didn't have one election for president in 2004,'' says Robert Pastor, who directs the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University. ''We didn't have fifty elections. We actually had 13,000 elections run by 13,000 independent, quasi-sovereign counties and municipalities.''

One of the strongest tests of the veracity of any conspiracy theory is the number of participants required for it to function . . . . . . and that quote in the paragraph above, taken from Kennedy's own piece, tells you this is another one requiring thousands of participants, pretty much all of whom would also need to stay silent or of a like mind over a lengthy period of time, an unlikely event given human nature.

The more people involved, the more compliance required, the more time involved, the less likely a conspiracy theory becomes.

It was also somewhat humourous he would cite the New York Times and Washington Post as dismissive of this bombshell given the former has flat out stated its a "liberal" newspaper and the other is often accused of the same.

None of that should change the obvious fact the hodgepodge nature by which Americans count their ballots is medieval in many ways.

Cowperson

[Sharpen 'Em]

There was speculation that there would be vote fraud before the election even took place. This isn't some new consipiracy theory that some just recently dreamed up. The company that supplied the electoronic voting machines called Diebold has been under investigation ever since the election. For a whole bunch of info on Diebold go to this site...
http://www.bradblog.com/

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

''We didn't have one election for president in 2004,'' says Robert Pastor, who directs the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University. ''We didn't have fifty elections. We actually had 13,000 elections run by 13,000 independent, quasi-sovereign counties and municipalities.''

One of the strongest tests of the veracity of any conspiracy theory is the number of participants required for it to function . . . . . . and that quote in the paragraph above, taken from Kennedy's own piece, tells you this is another one requiring thousands of participants, pretty much all of whom would also need to stay silent or of a like mind over a lengthy period of time, an unlikely event given human nature.

The more people involved, the more compliance required, the more time involved, the less likely a conspiracy theory becomes.

Are you suggesting that this quote is in any way a reflection of the number of people implicated? If so, that's a spectacular misrepresentation of the article. Let's put a bit of context around that little bit you quoted:
"Any election, of course, will have anomalies. America's voting system is a messy patchwork of polling rules run mostly by county and city officials..."

Taken in context, the quote states that the US electoral system has flaws in it partially because there's no strong top-down system of ensuring fair and accurate results. If anything, the quote is demonstrating how fewer participants are needed for electoral fraud, since there's no strong monitoring system. The text that you quote as demonstrating a massive conspiracy theory is merely complaining about the lack of checks and balances.

I agree fully with your suggestion that the more alleged conspirators, the less likely the conspiracy. Most of the fraud allegations rest around one guy; if you believe that all of the various rules and court challenges Blackwell instituted in the days and weeks leading up to the election were in good faith to reduce fraud, then there's no problem. If you believe that he was intentionally trying to limit new voter registration to disenfranchise thousands of legitimate and mostly Democratic voters, then obviously that's a form of fraud. You don't need to question thousands of people to find the fraud, you merely need to examine the motives of one partisan official.

I believe some accusations about Blackwell (and believed them long before reading this article), but have a hard time with other supposed riggings in Ohio, many of which are based largely on hearsay. I also suspect that there are instances of fraud and attempted fraud that we've heard nothing about from both parties. But I do find it shocking that anyone in the media, in politics, or in the public would be content with an electoral system in which there are so many allegations of fraud; elections should be the most transparent process, and instead they seem to be increasingly invisible and arcane.

[RedMan12]

Americans care more about who is the next American Idol then who is running their country.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Igottago

If something did happen, people need to know about it. I don't think its a matter of saying "well its over now, forget it"..our American neighbours are supposed to be the poster boy for democracy. There is no harm in investigating it. And with the regime in charge right now, I wouldn't put it past them.

It's widely known in advanced nations that the US system is the most flawed quasi-democratic system around. The electoral college? WTF is that?

That said, in underdeveloped nations, they do seem to be the poster boy.

[tussery]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

Americans care more about who is the next American Idol then who is running their country.

I must not be American...

[Azure]

Originally Posted by tussery

I must not be American...

No kidding. You like to stereotype Redman?

[Zarathustra]

Originally Posted by Azure

No kidding. You like to stereotype Redman?

Originally Posted by Azure

You're just as bad as the Islamics because you want people eliminated for expressing their freedom.

Interesting...

[RedMan12]

Originally Posted by tussery

I must not be American...

I lived there for 10 years. I am just stating fact. More people voted for American Idol then they did for the 2004 elections. Granted its easier to vote for American Idol and there is less restrictions such as age. Just trying to make a point. Americans have more important things to do then vote for a President.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

I lived there for 10 years. I am just stating fact. More people voted for American Idol then they did for the 2004 elections. Granted its easier to vote for American Idol and there is less restrictions such as age. Just trying to make a point. Americans have more important things to do then vote for a President.

Or maybe it has something to do with those millions of teenagers that watch American Idol, can vote for it, but aren't allowed to vote in the election.

[Kool Keef]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

I lived there for 10 years. I am just stating fact. More people voted for American Idol then they did for the 2004 elections. Granted its easier to vote for American Idol and there is less restrictions such as age. Just trying to make a point. Americans have more important things to do then vote for a President.

Some 120 million voted in the 2004 Presidential election. 63 million voted for the American Idol finals. How is this more?

Additionally, you don't have to be an American citizen to vote, you don't have to be at least 18, and you can vote as many times as you want -- hardly a fair comparison.

Finally, I think the ratings for the final of American Idol was something like 45 million. That's still far below the 120 million that thought it was important enough to leave their homes, go to the polls and punch a card.