General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe 2000 Election was stolen
Comments to the contrary are ridiculous.
All the typing this last week making excuses for the outright theft do nothing more than, well, make excuses for the theft.
After 2000, electronic voting was put in place by the republicans. In about 2003, DU began to discuss this matter. So when the 2004 election was stolen by the same people who stole 2000, many people were quite aware about what had happened.
DU, however, was the only place that was up in arms about the theft and many of us worked diligently to get rid of much electronic voting after 2004.
See the archives of the Election Forum from back then.
By 2008, an informed and educated public was ready for the theft. Then the turnout for Obama, because of the Hope and Change he promised, overwhelmed the thieves and they could not steal enough votes to overcome the numbers of new voters.
Oh, they stole many votes, maybe as many as 7 million across the US, but it was too big and massive of a turnout.
Those are FACTS.
So please, yall just quit with making excuses for the theft of our democracy, it makes yall look rather childish. Besides dumb.
And be ready for them to try and steal the coming elections. Because you know they will. The republicans can hardly win any other way.
napi21
(45,806 posts)I'm doing everything I can to make sure every Dem I know or meet votes in November. Not only in my state, but in the states where I know people. My son & his wife are going to Pa. for his new job. It's a temp to hire but the temp job is to last 4-5 months. I'm hoping for his sake that they hire him on permanently, but if he's still there in Nov. I told him to make sure he votes that idiot Gov. out, and every other repug that's on the ballot.
I have a good feeling about Ga. (whre I live now) for this Nov. Many Georgians like Jason Carter because they remember his Grandfather Jimmy who was once a Ga. governor. Michelle Nunn seems to be also favored here. OH how I'd love for her to replace that Repug Senator.
We ALL nee to promote voting in Nov. to every contact we have...unless they're Repugs of course!
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Much like the state of Texas, or the Kerry campaign in 2004, the DEM Establishment quietly surrenders to the GOP without a fight.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Dems have done a lot. Witness these facts: In 2000 we had voting systems that had been in place for many years with little complaints. By 2004 we had electronic systems. Those systems came about because of the stolen election of 2000, and 9/11. In the turmoil of 9/11, bush and his cronies were given great latitude. But after 2004, Democrats were the main force behind getting rid of electronic voting machines.
The problem always has been that Democrats are also elected with the voting systems, so they were caught in a catch-22. If they complained long and hard, they would be calling into question their own vote counts, and also, the biggee: The whole damn system. Not many would last long calling into question the whole damn system. That's partly why it was only on DU that such questions could even be entertained. Most places quashed any discussions, and even on DU many trolls attempted to quash our discussions. But they failed.
It was work mainly in state legislatures that the changes back to paper ballots occurred. Republicans resisted, but the public demanded the changes and the Dems got the changes passed. Not much happened at the federal level except for stiffer requirements of the voting apparatus, again which republicans resisted.
I wish I could sit here and say that all is well, but it is not. Many systems are still privately owned and privately maintained. The one thing they can not do is steal an election with a massive turnout. That's why republicans have been passing all kinds of voter laws trying to limit turnout.
longship
(40,416 posts)Which is good. Also, when I lived in CA a few years ago, paper ballots. Also , in CA anybody can vote by mail, which is extra good.
There were changes for the better.
But your point is well taken. Re: 2000.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)If Nader hadn't been there to drain progressive votes away from Gore, the Rethugs would never have been close enough to steal the election.
Unknown Beatle
(2,672 posts)Regardless if Nader ran or not, they still stole the election. The point is that repugs used and will continue to use electronic voting machines to steal elections.
Do you honestly think that people in Texas are stupid and gullible? It's more than a coincidence that Texas has always had a dem for governor, but as soon as bush ran, a very popular Ann Richards lost to an idiot. The vote has been stolen since then. perry hasn't won an honest election since he first ran for governor, thanks largely in part to electronic computerized voting machines. And the fucked up part in all of this is Texas is still using the same machines that steal elections.
Blaming Nader is part of the problem when we should instead focus on repugs stealing and cheating their way into office. We should be doing something to put a stop to it instead.
If Nader hadn't been there to drain progressive votes away from Gore, the Rethugs would never have been close enough to steal the election.
They would have stolen it anyway. jeb, harris, and the scotus would have made sure of that. 97,488 votes is a drop in the bucket compared to the millions they stole around the country.
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)to successfully hide the major stealing that would have been necessary.
It only worked with Bush because the vote was so close.
snot
(10,538 posts)1) ensuring fair elections, vs.
2) discouraging people from exercising their right to run,
I think we should focus on 1).
pnwmom
(108,995 posts)Third party candidates always draw votes away from whichever major party is closer in viewpoint, allowing the opposing party to win. This never makes sense.
We would need a parliamentary system to avoid this. But as it stands now, having another more liberal party in an election just divides the vote and increases the chances of a conservative win.
JHB
(37,162 posts)Don't forget to mention the Clinton administration's promotion of neoliberal economic policies that continued and expanded the outsourcing and offshoring of good jobs, union-busting, corporate consolidation, and Wall Street wheeling and dealing that fueled all of the above.
Don't forget the "junior-high clique" media coverage of the campaign that cushioned Bush's risible business record and questionable departure from the TANG during wartime while trumpeting every bullshit Republican-talking-point about Gore (earth tones, "inventing the internet", etc.).
Don't forget self-proclaimed "originalists" on the Supreme Court, who have spent their careers decrying "judicial activism", handing down the most activist and by any measure non-"originalist" decision in American history.
If any of those were different, it would have changed the outcome too. All of them put the election in a place where it was close enough to steal.
Hell, if either of the two microscopic socialist parties running presidential candidates in Florida had sent their votes to Gore instead, it would have been enough counted votes to change it.
The Naderites were myopic, only focused on the economic issues and ignoring judicial appointments (rather ironic, considering how Ralphie became a public figure). And also ignored "where's Ralph been for the last four years, since the last time he did this?"
It's easy to rail at protest voters, if you ignore why they were protesting in the first place. And while 2000 should be a caution to protest voters about what might result, it should also be a caution to a coalition political party to work somewhat harder to keep the parts of that coalition on-board.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Or should we forget about those, because netting +50k in cross-party votes blows up the argument?
rock
(13,218 posts)and with pin-point accuracy. Thanks!
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)You are welcome, too.
former9thward
(32,082 posts)They are not facts. When you make extreme statements you need to present extreme evidence. You have given none. Where exactly were these 7 million votes stolen? Why is it that no one except internet bloggers write about this? Are the campaign professionals too stupid to know about this? Only bloggers on the internet know this? Is the DNC part of the conspiracy? CT through and through. I know you will link to CT websites rather than anything serious.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The exit-polls are the proof. The votes in subsequent years show the evidence. The math doesn't lie.
If you are able to provide any proof millions of votes were not stolen by the greatest criminals ever in office in the US, I'd like to see those facts.
As posted above, the Democrats have been in the lead of revamping the vote systems. They have to be very careful, tho, mainly because some people just can't believe the system has been corrupted.
Are you in denial of the facts that vote systems have been corrupted?
former9thward
(32,082 posts)Neither has the Democratic Party which is why they don't buy into the CT either. The exit poll stuff has been debunked time after time but CTers don't want to let go.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Have you looked for it? Plenty in the DU archives.
The party sure as hell has recognized the implications. Who do you think has worked to get rid of paperless ballots? The republicans? Hah!
As for the exit polls, the evidence of manipulations has NOT been disproved. Your saying so just goes to show you are in denial of obvious criminal activity by the bushies.
Back to square one with you: Are you in denial that the 2000 election was stolen? Yes, or no? Put it another way: Do you believe bush was honestly elected?
greytdemocrat
(3,299 posts)Warpy
(111,358 posts)There was massive material on DU then. The statewide count done by the consortium of newspaper publishers confirmed that Gore won, but that only a statewide recount would have given him that win, a statewide recount Stupid's brother Jeb had refused to authorize. The USSC decision was based on the fact that people in the state were getting unequal treatment because so few counties were being recounted. That's some Catch-22, worthy of a tin pot dictator getting a rubber stamp in a banana republic.
I'm sorry that either your memory is short or that you never bothered to read to the end of the article the newspapers published, but those are all FACTS.
The 2000 election was stolen by a corrupt and partisan USSC working with the losing candidates brother.
They were also caught red handed faking election results, especially in Ohio, in 2004. Did you miss all that?
With an utterly supine corporate press, of course private citizens have stepped into the breach.
I suppose all this is upsetting to read, it challenges the assumption that US elections have anything at all to do with fairness or transparency or that the press reports actual news instead of infotainment about celebrities, especially talentless ones.
However, unless you let go of those assumptions, you're setting yourself, your country and your party up for more election theft.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And this subject has plenty of complexity. Yet people love to try and simplify it down to a single thing.
2000 was stolen due to a large number of factors. Some of them are:
- Gore ran a poor campaign, and followed DC's edict that he must run away from Clinton.
- The media decided bashing Gore was great sport, while W was their good buddy.
- Republicans yanked the registration of tons of voters in lots of states.
- The "Brooks Brothers riot" that miraculously resulted in zero arrests
- The SCOTUS made a blatantly partisan decision that is now a stain that O'Connor is desperately trying to clean up.
- And Nader did take a lot more votes from Gore than he did from W.
Lose any one of those factors, and the theft can't happen.
Instead, you get this:
So did Nader cause Gore to lose? Yes. So did the media. So did the SCOTUS. So did Republican registration games. So did Gore's campaign. All of them had to happen in order for 2000 to be stolen.
We're supposed to be the ones who can handle complexity. However there's plenty of people who want to use 2000 to attack their favorite demons. So they oversimplify it to their favorite cause.
We're also supposed to not be so fucking dumb that we fracture the party this close to an important election. So how 'bout we stop rehashing this over and over again until December? We can scream at each other all we want for Christmas.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Admitting it is a good first step.
And many good Democrats have worked hard to make sure votes can be cast and then counted properly. Because they know millions of votes can easily be miscounted.
It is a shock to the populous to be apprised that their votes can be miscounted and elections stolen. It should be no surprise to aware individuals on DU, tho. The 2000 election was stolen and they haven't stopped trying to steal elections.
Being that many people do not vote because they don't think it will matter, it behooves us to make sure that each and every vote is counted properly. Such is not now the case. And making excuses for theft is of no help. It is that simple.
MADem
(135,425 posts)trouble...
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/Mississippi_Turning
Lest we forget....
I agree--we CAN walk and chew gum at the same time; even different flavors of gum, at different paces, too...!
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,771 posts)pull something as blatant as this. It would be very well publicized by our corporate media. I'll bet the great majority of Americans don't know about this.
MADem
(135,425 posts)that it was just one story in a sea of blah and blur!
Maddow did remind people about it a few years back (so did Joey Scar from a differing perspective):
It's just wrong, is what it is.
Takket
(21,634 posts)PDittie
(8,322 posts)Not by much, though.
Even agreeing with your facts, there's not a lot that can be done about electronic voting at this point. It's widespread, deemed trustworthy even by Democratic election officials (Dana Debeauvoir in Travis County -- Austin, TX -- is just one of many) and not going away anytime soon.
The Oregon model of everyone voting on a paper mailed ballot would be the best, but most states, blue ones and red ones, simply aren't going do it.
That ship has sailed.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It was always a diversion from the supine submission of most of the mainstream Democratic Party to the theft.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Much has already been accomplished. Progress was achieved by many individuals, in each voting district across the US, demanding a cleaner system. Some places have seen more success than others. My own state of NC has completely reversed the electronic trend and now have all paper ballots.
Florida, also. Georgia still has a lot of idiot republicans in office and electronic ballots. Funny, isn't it, how both Florida and NC, ended up electing Obama in 2008 after somehow electronically electing bush?
PDittie
(8,322 posts)and I wish I could agree that there was more to be made, but I don't think there will be. There just isn't the call for reform that there was after 2000, which suggests it will require another incident to occur that compels the issue back to the forefront.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The progress that continues will be all the educated eyes looking at the results. The crooks know that we know that they know that they will try to steal many votes. They can easily get away with doing so with some votes, but there are places they know they can be caught.
Everyone everywhere should pay attention to how their votes are counted and there are, like i say, many places that have such citizens. That is progress in action.
There was a poster years ago who used the slogan: Never Give Up.
As true today as it was then. The vote is too important to ignore who counts it.
Stevepol
(4,234 posts)Remember when you use electronic voting, in particular with the touch screen machines, there's either no way to recount or audit the results so the evidence has to be totally based on exit polling, and in cases where there is paper, there may not be laws allowing for recounts or audits except where the petitioner provides a lot of money for the process. So you either can't recount/audit or by law it's very difficult or impossible to do it.
Keep in mind the principle: When the vote is counted in total secrecy without the possibility of verifying the vote, YOU CAN'T HAVE A DEMOCRACY.
That's partly what the 2009 German high constitutional court found when they outlawed electronic vote counting in all elections in Germany. Here's A link to an article about this court case (largely unreported in the US media):
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Germany-bans-computerized-by-Paul-Lehto-090303-583.html
Probably the best source for EVIDENCE of the theft of the 2000 and 2004 elections is found in the archives at BradBlog. I'd recommend going to that site and investigating the numerous articles, videos, etc. that bear on that subject.
By the way, I don't think there are any countries in Europe that use electronic vote counting anymore, with the exception of perhaps the Netherlands. Nearly all, like Germany, have flirted with them and later stopped using them when they realized the facts about their use in democratic elections.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And the election was stolen.
Ralph, though, made it possible for the GOP to cheat within the margins of error.
Without Ralph (and the GOP aid he got), it would have been much, MUCH harder for them to sell that bullshit. It may have not been possible.
peoli
(3,111 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I don't know if there will be a third party challenge this election; hopefully not. But if there is I hope that the people who supported Nader (and I was one of them) choose not to repeat the deception that there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats.
Bryant