That is to say - not legitimate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511809605

where Bullhorn Bill flipped tens of thousands of votes. Also the initial exit poll had Sanders winning

and as far as i'm concerned, any place where exit polling differed by more than a few points needs to be recounted. the state department uses that as its standard for other countries, let's adopt it as the standard for our own.

of painting every state Bernie loses as a "corrupt" win?

The smoke and fire thingy is in play here.

No matter how high it goes. Debbie DINO, I'm looking at you.

NONE of our primary results are legitimate because the very fact that our elections can be hacked makes results neither reliable nor trustworthy.

Super easy to hack.

Demonstrated many, many times by respected organizations and universities.

We have been fools to not make a huge fuss about it before now.

I travel around the state of Virginia very often for business, and everywhere I went there was much stronger support for Bernie over Hillary. Conversations, signs, bumper stickers - WAY more support for Bernie; excited support. I don't believe HRC got 65% of the vote to 35% for Bernie. I strongly feel this result was heavily manufactured.

Regardless, we must fight for paper ballots, same day voting registration, open primaries, and an end to super delegates. These 4 things will help make our country fairer, more open, more DEMOCRATIC.

...Stated that the computers were easily hackable in the first month of taking office. She moved on to other things without addressing the situation any further. Go figure!

But the audits can be hacked as seen in Chicago.

The establishment has its thumb on the scale. Only crooked people are blind to that fact.

I agree, somehow the voting is being manipulated and the locals just don't understand that they are the ones that have to stand up to this.

I worked the polls for many years and our head of the BOE would school all of the poll workers before each election. She would say, 'Follow the rules, don't make mistakes because if I have to go to court (finger point around the room) you will be coming with me! Elections were serious business.

I watched some of the AZ meetings and one Chicago BOE audit meeting. The attitudes of the BOE's were disgusting. For one thing it is clear, they don't work for the people. They treaed the people with open distain. All of this is fallout from the * era where nothing and no one was treated with respect. Integrity, consideration and respect for the process is gone...out the door!

Sid

Little people get an opinion, too, pal.
Little people get a vote, too, pal.
Little people can get together and take a big clown down, pal.
And even if only one little person knows the truth and speaks it,
big naked emperor type clowns can be de-throned.

So take your naked imperial "O.K." and stick a fork in it!

suck it up, buttercup.

Sid

and be sure to follow the Sane Progressive on youtube

I forgot to add that Debbie (Sane Progressive) has a petition on change.org to try and get Bernie to address this:

https://www.change.org/p/bernie-sanders-bernie-sanders-must-contest-arizona-election-results-and-address-systemic-election-rigging

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511809605

https://www.gofundme.com/auditchicagovote

thanks for the link

I am losing "friends" on twitter because ppl are sick of my Bernie posts BUT I'm gaining new, political friends. lol..

everything else will fall into place

If she thinks that Bernie is deliberately caving to the Hillary camp.

No...he...is...NOT! He's always been in this to win.

I think she just disowned that label "sane" with this rant.

That's a given. Seek no further explanation.

Let's not get too carried away with silly season here.

What an epic insult to democracy. This website was formed because of the 2000 stolen election, and now we have been invaded by people who ridicule election fraud right out in the open here.

But what lies there is US democracy. It's been there since 2000 when it was way obvious. At about 2010 I made my peace that we all pretend to vote in pretend elections held in a pretend democracy. This has not one thing to do do with Sanders, but they will tell you such

The first step in recovering whatever we can of democracy is a wide spread understanding that we pretend to vote. The down side is that the whole system loses legitimacy at that point.

I suspect one reason for lousy voter participation is that people know this. So why waste your time in a corrupt election?

I know that's what the oligarchs are hoping for. So instead I'll fight it and get called a conspiracy theorist.

I don't care what they call me though

I just don't expect it to count as cast

They would rather make fun of us as "sore losers" in "denial" than confront the very real problems that have been reported all across the country, for years now.

It's a weird mix of pride, anger, complacency, and laziness. There is an old-fashioned word for this, it used to be called "decadence."

How much money do you think is in Swiss banks? Well not physically there...trusts, foundations and shell companies formed at other places? $2.3 T. By far it is not all the capital flight from all over, but a good chunk. This is also in 2013 dollars. My error, 2015 dollars

I suspect some folks hope to someday be in that club

Yeah, yeah. Pretend elections are needed to keep the rubes happy I suppose. Money will not buy in the long term clean water and air though.

Have you seen the crowds at Bernie's events? The excitement people have because they have someone to vote FOR? They care, people care a lot. They've been beaten down for decades, conned and vilified, robbed.

They care...we care...and we're mobilizing.

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2016, 02:42 PM - Edit history (1)

I've argued that elections have consequences so it's important to get engaged ... and they typically just laugh at my senior naivete. I'm beginning to agree with them seeing what's gone on in this primary. Millennials have come out fr or Bernie because he represents their world view and values, but the system is proving them right re: pretending to vote, pretending to elect.

if not already doing it (Yes I talk to them too), They are getting radicalized. So something will happen here, and it won't be pleasant.

Have three kids ages 28-33. THey've been hearing the word "revolution" from among their peers for 10 years now.

People are whistling past that...

They are poicking up where the 60s generation left off.

and I agree with them when they say voting will not change a thing. Of course I also agree with them that with climate change a lot of the issues partisans take seriously *coughsupremecourtcough* will be immaterial in ten to twenty years.

...and only joined the DNC lawsuit after Clinton did.

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/04/13/17564/

MA, where the exit polls were adjusted and hand counts came out in Bernie's favor.

https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/ma-primary-unadjusted-exit-poll-indicates-bernie-won/

I challenge Her to try and run in the general election as a completely illegitimate candidate. I'm sure that will work out.

I'd prefer paper ballots.

In NY the purge only happened in Brooklyn. Not Queens, not the Bronx, not Manhattan, not Staten Island, and not Long Island. All of which Hillary carried handily. Whatever happened there it was localized there.

Same for Chicago. Whatever happened, happened because of the CBOE. But because the way Illinois is, where Chicago goes, so goes the whole state. There are 12.88 million people in Illinois, about 2.7 million of them live in Chicago proper, and 5.2 million of them live in Cook County. So whatever happens in Cook County, for the most part, wins the state. Meaning Illinois is ripe for corruption and other issues. Unlike NY because of the boroughs, northern suburbs of NYC and Long Island population densities.

Each state's situation is different. In AZ its about republican voter suppression and gerrymandering. Chicago and Illinois, rank corruption. NYC is its own compartmentalized animal.

This stuff happens all the time, at every point in American history. After probably the first election, we haven't had a clean one since we split between Jefferson (state power) and Madison (federal power) political groups. Its been a total mess from that point forward.

It wasn't acceptable in 1791, its not acceptable now, but its what we've lived with because we have not collected together enough to clean it up. And that's what we need to do, collect together and clean up this patchwork system of elections we've got.

I'm a Madison type, I believe we're better with a strong central government. Obviously the states and counties are incapable of operating a clean election or having any kind of common standard, that's the exact time the a strong central government needs to step in and normalize things.

We should have a uniform electoral process that all parties must adhere to. We should have standard voting machines that every county uses and every voter knows. We should have automatic voter registration, or no registration at all, just show up and vote. And other things, but the point is our process should be uniform and well known to the population. It also should be easy and encouraging to vote, we should have a national holiday every year just for voting.

it is the only way to have transparent elections

@Elect_Justice 2 add Queens, Manhattan, Suffolk County, Nassau County, Bronx, Westchester County

https://mobile.twitter.com/JordanChariton/status/723328253373636608

CoffeeCat had enough stories about hinky things going on there. And that was just one caucus location. I am sure there were others.

AZ: vote suppression by throwing eligible voters off the voting rolls and reducing number of voting places.

Thousands of people waited in 4 to 5 hour lines in AZ only to be told, when they got to the front of the line, that their registration had been CHANGED without their knowledge, and they couldn't vote, and there was no remedy.

Further, Clinton did well in early voting returns vs Sanders doing well in same day voting. There were no reported problems for early voters. This suggests that Sanders voters were targeted.

Also, the tactic of stripping people off the eligible voting list shows up in two different states--AZ and NY--which suggests a systemic problem.

It appears to me that what we are seeing is the result of the invasion of PRIVATE electronic corporations into our voting system, which began in the 2002 to 2004 period, leading up to the Bush-Cheney theft of 2004. The takeover of our system is now complete. All states are using 'TRADE SECRET' code in their systems--code that the public is forbidden by law to review. Half the states have no audit at all (comparison of ballots to electronic totals). The other half have a miserably inadequate 1% audit (not nearly sufficient to detect fraud). There is virtually no hand-counting any more. Even states that do have paper ballots use electronic scanners and 'TRADE SECRET' code tabulators to count them. Since 99% of the ballots are never seen by human eyes, the count can be tampered with and no one would know it.

The ONLY check we have on electronic fraud are exit polls, which are used everywhere in the world to detect election fraud. But, in 2004, here, they began quickly 'ADJUSTING' the exit polls to match the 'official count.' Jonathan Simon caught them at it with a screen shot, on election night 2004, showing a Kerry win in the exit polls, which were then ALTERED to reflect the 'official' 'TRADE SECRET' code result (Bush wins). Simon and others tried to get the polling firm (Edison-Mitofsky) to release their raw exit poll data but they never would.

Electronics makes stripping the voter rolls quick and easy, as well as making flipping votes quick and easy. And the use of private corporations opened our system to numerous entry points for fraudulent activities.

2006, Mexico. Calderon won by razor thin margins. Mitofsky's exist polls did not match the official tally. This is hardly just limited to the US.

Virtually every NY poll had Hillary winning by double digits. She won by double digits. This is her home state and she was a popular Senator here for nearly a decade. What about this loss must be explained by chicanery?

Bernie fans, we will need you in November. We will be going against Donald Trump. Will you be with us, if only to ensure he loses?

And she is in charge of the Democratic side of the election? How is that allowed?

I'm going to keep jumping into the air until I stick!

How annoying!

should have already gained a decent level of maturity...

I don't. Many times the person who challenged an election ends up with less votes.

the whole Orange Revolution in the Ukraine was premised on this. We as a government, accuse other countries of shenanigans often, but if we looked at the US electoral system the way we look at systems abroad, we would not pass muster. The government would accuse us of not running a clean election.

By the way, the irony is striking.

My irony meter is now permanently broken.

Sorry, you're relating a completely different situation, this is an easy situation as we have laws and we can file a lawsuit.

The Republican woman in NY was suspended and will likely be fired based on her actions in Brooklyn.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511817304

The silence is deafening in that thread. Nobody is interested in the facts of the case, it's all about collecting cheap political points.

We have corrupt elections, have had them since at least 2000, if not longer, and these days I pretend to vote, and I do not expect it to count. They are compromised, and not legitimate any more,

This is about whatever remains of democracy... I crack myself up.

I still will "vote," I just don't expect it to count the way I intended it to count anymore.

At least I can tell myself a lie that I "participated." At the very least the parties should offer a burger and a beer or beverage of your choice. Yes it is that blatant anymore.

I think you're probably overreacting a little bit and you'll just have to live with the fact that that probably appears to you as if it is an insult.

It is what it is

It doesn't matter what you think.

that it is exhausting

I've been paying attention to discussion of verifiable problems. When exit polls don't match by 12%. There's too many to list, and they all favor one candidate, which is of little consequence in terms of whether or not these races were fair. But there is a list, and this time evidence is being compiled.

The Democratic and Republican leaders in the 2016 White House race are unusually unpopular nationally, polls show, despite their success with voters in their respective parties.

So why isn't that unpopularity reflected in the vote count?