ELECTION FRAUD, BLOWBACK AND HOW TO SUPPORT DEMOCRATS

Let's look at the big picture:

Suppose you were Rove and you wanted to undermine support for the DNC and the Dem Party as a whole. You introduce enough doubt into the election system, exit polls, etc. to make everyone, esp. the Dems, think twice about placing their bets (contributions and time) on what is ultimately a rigged game. You make sure everyone knows that if the system is rigged, it's rigged to favor Republicans. You get Walden O'Dell to do that by saying he's going to do whatever it takes for Bush to win Ohio. You make sure there's lots of paperless e-votin' machines throughout the country, esp. in swing states, and you let the Democrats, or some elements of the party such as us, disseminate this information so you appear to have nothing to do with it (the information that is) -- just like the Rather memo.

Support for the party erodes because the Dems are powerless to prove the actual fraud and also powerless to stop it, except in some isolated cases or in the event of a landslide here and there. Some of the Dems may have even been complicit in the fraud unwittingly or otherwise, but that's another issue.

Now, without even actually stealing the election, you have impaired the Dems' ability to raise funds and you are free to bury them with disinformation, attack ads, etc. funded by your own loyal Republican contributors who either didn't get the memo that the process may be rigged, or who know, thanks in part to our efforts, that if it is rigged, it favors Republicans anyway. So the RNC can still rake in the bucks!

Brilliant ain't it?

If, as most of us believe, the election really was rigged, the DNC doesn't want us to know this because they can't fix the problem. They know we will not want to throw good money after bad but they want those contributions, so they tell us reports of fraud are merely "anecdotal."

So what's the answer?

I think we each need to contribute to the candidates of our choice directly, instead of through the DNC. This should be done before the Primaries to get better candidates on the ballot for the general election where needed, and afterward to target the funding to take back the Congress, etc.

Same for state and local races.

We could contribute more in states with paper ballots where fraud is less likely and make this known to the DNC. They will eventually get the message.

We can encourage candidates and their election lawyers to contest more election results in states without adequate safeguards to rule out count corruption. We can contribute to GELAC funds to support this. Kerry failed to use most of the money in his GELAC fund, but this doesn't mean others will follow suit, esp. if we make it a condition of our support for them in the first place. Make it a campaign issue!

What we should also be doing is pointing out that if the system can be gamed, it can be gamed by either side! We need to put some fear into the Republicans that they may have created a Frankenstein -- that there could be blowback from allowing the system to become so vulnerable to tampering and fraud -- that they may be the next victims -- that no party or candidate is really safe -- and for the evangelicals, that there but for the grace of God go they!

Only then can there be any true reform.

This is why it can be counter productive to continue to take the partisan view that the Republicans stole the election, without at least highlighting the possibility that it can work both ways.

The high within-precinct error in the Exit Polls certainly went both ways. It was just a little higher in the Bush direction and that's what tipped the scale. This is a point that has been made by very few of us, so eager to "prove" that Kerry won. But it has been well documented since Mitofsky's Jan. report. We should use it.

The fact is the system is broken, it can be manipulated to favor either side depending on who's in control of the machinery, and this is something that should concern every voter, including the Republicans. They will not share this concern if all we keep saying is that they can steal elections with impunity.

What do you think?

I think you're actually putting out 4 separately issues here, which can be addressed individually.

1. That's an interesting idea about the DNC playing down election fraud because they "can't do anything about it". The only thing that that theory has going for it IMO is that there don't appear to be any decent alternative theories to counteract it. I don't know, but it doesn't seem plausible to me. Why would they think that they can't do anything about the most important barrier to their re-elections that currently exists? I think that it is more likely that they think that if they try to do something about it that they will be pilloried by the MSM as sore losers (which IMO is a really bad mistake). Well, maybe that's similar to your theory.

2. What to do about it? That's a very difficult question. Your idea may be the best available alternative. I'm torn between throwing money down the toilet vs. making threats to the DNC that I won't contribute until they make election reform a priority, even if I'm only bluffing in the long run.

3. I don't agree at all that we should counter them by threatening to cheat ourselves. For one thing, I don't think that we could possibly be as good at it as them. I think that improving the integrety of elections is a far better choice than trying to counter cheating with cheating.

4. I don't agree with your statement that the WPE was just a little higher in the Bush direction. The overall WPE was -6.5, with exit polls favoring Kerry in that direction, compared with the official results (i.e., red shift). Anywhere from 13 to 17 states had WPEs that were outside the margin of error (two SDs, or 95% probability) for the whole state in that direction, whereas none had WPEs outside the margin of error in the other direction. Some states had WPEs in the other direction (i.e., with plus signs), though none were statistically significant in that direction. Were there individual precincts with blue shifts outside of the margin of error? With 1250 precincts, I suppose that there must have been a handful (or maybe not), but certainly the shift due to WPE in general was far to the red side.

1. They can't do anything about it if they don't have at least a majority in Congress, or a few swing votes from the other side, or some good court cases in which the machines are shown forensically or otherwise not to be counting votes as cast. They may never get any of this if the vote is rigged or they don't contest elections. Catch 22.

The first party to get and maintain control of the counting process will never be driven from power and that seems to be the Republicans. What were the results of the recent Senate hearings at which Chris Dodd and Trent Lott both said there was no need for a paper audit trail? Are all those federal verified voting bills dead again now or what? This has been going on since Apr. 2003!

Only the state/local govts. can bail the Dems out now, and this only if there are VVPBs and/or VVPATs that are actually counted. There are a few other ways to rule out major fraud but I haven't even heard them seriously discussed outside of certain activist circles, such as 100% bi-partisan auditing of ALL BALLOT DEFINITION PROGRAMMING for one thing. But how often is this even mentioned or discussed? Instead it's VVPATs, VVPBs and MMRAs, and all this just to count 2 or 3% of the vote by hand? What about the other 97-98%? To me, this shows a complete lack of understanding of the problem and in many states, we can't even get that far.

We have a long way to go to be reasonably sure that our votes will be counted as cast. Random audits and paper audit trails aren't even enough, unless they serve to deter fraud. Deterrents are fine, but they don't always stop the crimes they're designed to deter -- not when the stakes are so high -- and they don't deter mistakes either.

2. I'll give you an example: Recently, Barbara Boxer asked her supporters to vote to give some of her PAC money to help reelect one of several Senators. She asked her supporters to vote for to whom the money should go since they were all worthy candidates. I voted for Debbie Stabenow of MI. Know why? Not because I'm intimately familiar with her voting record, but because they have paper ballots and optical scanners in her state and I know there's a reasonable chance the election won't be rigged there. Sending money to someone from FL, for example, is probably a complete waste. Katherine Harris-Blackwell is running for Senate in '06 with lots of paperless DREs. Need I say more?

As more states become VVPAT or VVPB states (no thanks to the Feds of course), more money can be sent to help them take back Congress one district or one state at a time. Until then, if there are enough states that DO count the votes, and can prove that they do, send the money and build the party there first! Let the DNC worry about the rest.

3. I didn't say we should threaten to cheat, or actually cheat. What I said, or meant to say, was that we need for the Repubs to understand that the system is unsafe and has the potential to be exploited by either side. Tomm made the analogy to nuclear weapons in another thread. These machines, if not properly audited and supervised by BOTH parties, are just too dangerous to be allowed to exist in their present form. The Repubs need to understand this as much as the Dems. There is too much concentration of power in too few hands.

3,000 people at most, are all that are needed to run every election for every race in the entire country, and this must change if the process is to have any integrity for either side. This doesn't mean we have to threaten to use these "weapons." We are after all, the good guys! We just need to let them know that we know what's up, and they should know this situation is unacceptable.

4. But there were HUGE bi-directional WPEs. The -6.5 mean simply averages out many of the larger errors. WPEs of > +/- 15% were not uncommon. How do we explain them? Perhaps there was Dem cheating, or perhaps the Repubs need to THINK there was for them to vote for any meaningful reforms.

All I'm saying is we should be using this to our advantage when making the reform argument. Let them think they would have had a frickin' LANDSLIDE if the count were correct. Who cares? The point is to get them to realize that the system is exploitable and to help us fix it. Merely saying that THEY can steal any elections THEY want to wouldn't give them much incentive to do change things, would it?

1. That's just too pessimistic for me. To say that the Dems. can't do anything about election fraud because they don't have the Presidency or either House of Congress is tantamount saying that they can't do ANYTHING -- for the same reason. Yet, they are fighting on other issues by making a big clamor about them so as to arouse public outrage. Why not do the same thing with election fraud?

2. Yes, I think may be right about giving money directly to the candidates rather than the DNC -- until they fight back with regard to election reform.

3. It depends on whether you're talking about Republican politicians or ordinary Republican people. I may be overly pessimistic about this, but I think the former are beyond reach. They are benefiting from the present system, that's all they seem to care about, and there's nothing to do about that except put public pressure on them. But ordinary Republican citizens may be reachable. That's why we need to make as much noise about this as possible and, like you said, try to get them to understand that our democracy is being taken away from us. However, I don't understand the concept of making the point that Dems can cheat too.

4. I think I answered this one above. I don't think that we reach out to ordinary Republicans by having them think that we can cheat too. What we need to do is get them to understand that the current Neocom regime is as bad for them as it is for us.

you'd have to believe that Republican votes for Kerry were switched about as often as Democratic votes for Kerry.

I believe there were already a fair number of Republicans who voted against the neoCons, or thought they did, and the neoCons still won the election.

What do you think about the possibility that Rove could be using the uncertainty built in to the system to get us NOT to contribute to the DNC? There is a risk that if the election was not stolen, we may be putting the party through an unnecessary sort of trauma at a time when they need all the support they can get. Of course actual fraud and getting us to THINK there was fraud are not mutually exclusive either!

I believe that there was lots of fraud, because:

1. A larger exit poll discrepancy than has ever occurred in a Presidential election in this country.

2. Lots of direct evidence of fraud, especially in Ohio:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=380878

3. Things such as this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=371211, combined with such things as Clint Curtis' testimony about being told to develop a program for vote switching, and the fact that the federal investigator working on Clint Curtis' leads was "suicided" in a hotel room.

4. Even Tucker Carlson predicted Bush's loss, for God sakes.

5. All the pre-election signs pointed to a Bush loss.

6. Who could watch those debates and still vote for Bush?

7. Secret voting machines owned by the GOP make it easy.

8. Much much more, as delineated on many threads floating around here, but I'm to tired to think about it now,

AND FINALLY

9. These people needed to win, to keep their power, because they couldn't afford to allow the investigations to occur, which would happen if Kerry won. They knew that they probably needed fraud to win, so ...... why fake fraud when you can actually do it, and in fact you probably need to do it in order to win?

Ralph Reed, Tom Noe, and a bunch of right-wing nuts colluded on the fraud and there is direct evidence along with testimony of the members involved....

Which this guy Ray Lemme got too close to, and there's even picture evidence and so on.

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/scoops/Lemme.htm

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/PoliChatter/Polichatter.htm

Disgusted yet? Oh yes, its all there. :puke: :puke:

...you ask "So what's the answer?"

...the answer is: play by the rules that have been in place for 3 election cycles now...those rules being "He/she who cheats best wins"

...the ones and zeros have been machine manipulated to give the ones to Republicans and the zeros to the Dems. If we ever expect to get "Real" again, we need to sieze power. We need to make sure the ones go to the democrates and the zeros go to the republicans.

...yes it is an ugly solution...however, how many rapes does one have to incur before the victim is allowed to retaliate with force? So far...3 and counting. Think about it.

http://www.commonblog.com/section/Elections

Force a VVPB to be mandated into law AND provide audits!!!! That can be done and the corrupt DLC can't stop it, aka Senator Dodd.

Do you know how many calls and letters these bastards got about this in Jan., right around the time Ohio's Electoral Votes were challenged?
I don't think we can force them to do anything.
But it's worth a try.

Also see post #3 "100% bi-partisan auditing of ALL BALLOT DEFINITION PROGRAMMING."

Random audits are unlikely to detect fraud, but this depends on how it's distributed. The only hope is that the VVPATs and random auditing will DETER fraud. Checking the Diebold- and ES&S- generated Ballot Defs can rule out a whole lot of crap though!

BTW, why aren't we blasting the Senate with calls and letters about this right now, now that there have been actual hearings? Is it the NEWS CYCLE? The Summer? Have we all given up? How about an UP OR DOWN VOTE on verifiable voting!

Thanks for posting the link to CommonBlog.

But you should start a campaign to get them blasted, and make sure this stays on number 1 issue (RIGHT after DSM)

http://usalone.com/index.htm

I agree with just about everything in this thread: point contributions to the candidate of your choice; massive campaign as per LightningFlash; and, my modest addition, build a fire under DNC. This was the last hurrah of the permanent bureaucracy, the Mandarins, hopefully. Dean will get the word from DFA and realize he's been screwed. Doctor's don't like to be made the fool. If he doesn't get it, this will be the last hurrah for DNC.

This brilliant post from NothingWithoutHope is a devastating indictment of the DNC report. They got their data from Blackwell! and called it reliable. OMf'ingG!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=381676&mesg_id=381676

Wake up America! I believe it's happening. Things can change in the 'twinkling of an eye' with enough hostility toward BushCo. People will believe what they think is true (even the NEP analysis Bill...haha...sorry...but remember I supported your O'Dell joke).

.....And bringing back REAL american government, instead of collusioN!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :banghead:

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/PoliChatter/Polichatter.htm

http://www.prospect.org/print-friendly/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html

I had wanted to read it. I just did, and it explains a lot.

In a special issue of Blueprint entitled "Why Gore Lost," From issued a scathing broadside against his former New Democratic ally. "By emphasizing class warfare," wrote From, "he seemed to be talking to Industrial Age America, not Information Age America."

So they don't even want to consider fraud from their paradigm, apparently.

That's the whole mission and kiboodle.

Check this out: Most Dems in congress don't even support election REFORM (and won't until late 2006 - too late to even effect the 2008 election)???
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x381595#381646

It is time to boycott ALL incumbents or candidates who do not support (and actively work for) meaningful election fraud investigation AND reform! NO EXCEPTIONS - PERIOD.

THIS... should be the new litmus test.

...the box, and that's what we need to do. Of course it goes so outside the box (the part about Dems threatening to do their own self-interested hacking) that it flips over on itself. (We're going to restore democracy by means of election fraud?). Also, though I've been a loyal Democrat for 40 years, I don't trust and don't like much of the Dem leadership, and I think they could just as easily become tyrants as the Bushites have done. (Power tends to corrupt...etc.) In fact, they ARE tyrants, to some extent. The vast majority of their constituency absolutely opposed the Iraq war, way back before the invasion, yet many of them voted for it. Same with global "free trade." Where as democracy? Where was majority rule on these matters?

I believe in Jefferson's and Madison's "balance of power." And I wish we DIDN'T HAVE the Dem/Repub lock on almost all political power. It is inherently corruptive.

On the other hand, I am most certainly worried about undermining Howard Dean, by people not donating. (I'm still withholding my little pittance.) And I'm worried about good Dems going down, because people are so fed up--and are so distrustful of our election system, which they are absolutely right to be distrustful of. It is awash in corruption and is giving us wrong results.

I have also personally not yet defected from the Dem Party because I so fear a fracturing of the Left as occurred in Germany 1933-34.

I want to back up a bit. You say that the Dem Party is helpless to do anything about election fraud. But I think you are forgetting the history of how this election system was put into place. The two key elements of it were, a) $4+ billion in HAVA money flooding into the states, and turning elections into big money deals--highly corruptive of state and local election officials, along with lavish lobbying by Diebold & co. (and the beginning of "revolving door" employment); and b) little or no control--permitting "trade secret" programming code, permitting partisan ownership and control of election systems, permitting lavish lobbying, almost no mandated verification, etc.

At the point at which this all happened, the Dem Party should have been burning the capitol down to get this changed. They should've been screaming bloody murder--and that roaring cry should have continued all through the election. They were silent. Dead silent.

This makes me very, very suspicious. And, if they were of a mind to, they could change all this overnight. Actually, I think Dean is trying to--without stepping on too many toes. He is in a minefield of corruption.

But think of this: What if we had ALL state/local Dem party people and elected officials adamant about verifiable elections? What if they were HELPING us? What if it was their top priority? What if the word had come down, and filtered through the ranks, that this MUST GET DONE.

It would change overnight. I truly believe that. It DOESN'T NEED a majority in Congress. Control over election systems still resides with the states! But that is not what is happening. We are seeing Dem obstruction and Dem corruption everywhere we look--in these state/local fights over election reform.

I mean, just take a look at Amaryllis's post on this thing at Beverly Hilton, sponsored by Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia! One of the featured speakers is a DEMOCRAT, Connie McCormack, head of Los Angeles County elections, shill for Diebold, and the leader of the witch-hunt against Kevin Shelley, precisely because Shelley was trying to crack down on "revolving door" employment as well as on Diebold election theft machines.

A Democrat. And she had BACKING from the top Dem state leaders!

I think this is all too typical, nationwide. And what I think is needed is a BIG BROOM within the Dem Party to get rid of these corrupt election officials--and those who support them.

Yes, the Dems would have a struggle in Florida and Texas and Georgia, and other places where Bushites have gained illegitimate power. But if this wave of reform started in the "blue" states, it would soon sweep the nation. It would become nearly impossible to maintain a stance in favor of unverifiable elections.

I do believe that's why they got rid of Shelley--he was starting just such a movement. He was THE national leader on the issue. I think the Bush Cartel was behind the phony charges against Shelley--and I don't know if McCormack is in league with them; it may just have been opportunistic on her part. But the other thing that is notable about it is the FAILURE of the other Dem leaders to support one of their own, who was unfairly charged and driven from office; with some of them piling on; and their quick and cowardly retreat in the face of a black ops/secret dossier type of campaign. Probably a lot of it was fear. I know that strongarm tactics were used in the state legislature to shut people up. And there is also probably some direct and indirect corruption (state Dems beholden to corrupt county election officials?).

Anyway, what a sorry-ass performance! And California is a Democratic stronghold!

I sure haven't solved the dilemma you have posed. If anything, I've made it more of a dilemma.

Sorry about that. But I just had to say all this. It's not a simple situation of the Dems having had the election stolen right out from under them (and a big win at that, in my opinion--Kerry by at least 10%), and now being helpless to reform the election system that was used for that theft. It's deeper and darker. And yet, in a way, it's more wide open, to be able to see WHERE the problem is, exactly. And this is exactly it, I think: that the Democrats PERMITTED the Bush Cartel to take over our election system, with a variety of motives, some of them just venal corruption.

I think the only solution is for Democrats to come out ripping and roaring about this fraudulent election SYSTEM. If people feel they're TRYING, then they WILL vote. Look at '04--the biggest turnout in history, with the Dems blowing the Bushites away in new voter registration, nearly 60/40, and people standing in ten hour lines to vote. People are hungry for change. They've had it up to here with the Bush Cartel--and if the truth were known, they've had it for quite some time now. Give them REAL hope that their vote will count--not candyass crap like the DNC report--or at the least, let them know that you are fighting like mad on behalf of democracy and majority rule, and they WILL vote.

I DO think that this is still possible. I think this is what Dean would be doing, if he had his druthers--but he doesn't yet fully have his druthers at the DNC. But he IS using the report to say in effect that there was widespread fraud. That's what the Arizona Republic newspaper just accused him of--and they're quite right, although they revile him for it. But it doesn't matter. People reading that editorial will read between the lines--that is, the people who need to know (the disenfranchised Kerry voters).

How we back him up, I think, is to go after people like Connie McCormack--and also by just keeping on with what we're doing, presenting the evidence in whatever forums we can get into or create, and relentlessly agitating for election reform.

I also think that the strategy of picking and choosing among Dem candidates is a good one. There are lots of really good people in the Dem Party. That's ANOTHER reason I haven't abandoned it. I heard N. Dakota's Dogan on the radio yesterday on CAFTA--a brilliant presentation!

Our message to the DNC should be: Clean house! Get out that BROOM!

-------

Amaryllis' post on the Beverly Hilton event is at
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x380340

And here's a DU post on the Arizona Republic editorial
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=381796&mesg_id=381796

I said we need to get the other guys to acknowledge the possibility that it could happen. They need to see that reform is in their enlightened self-interest. This is the how they think. They don't give a crap about anyone else. They will not vote for reform unless they think it can benefit them. They won't think that unless they too believe that the election can be stolen -- by someone else!

It's an indictment of the SYSTEM, that's all.

Now I'll read the rest of your post, PP. :)

which I mentioned to you in another thread, is that when the Dems voted for HAVA, some or perhaps MANY of them, did NOT realize that the paper audit trail was NOT voter verified. I have this on good authority.

This may have been a last minute Republican change, or someone just didn't bother to read or question it. The precise circumstances of how this came about would be a matter of historical importance and it might be useful to publicize it for the record. Maybe those RAW/BRAD BLOGGERS could do that.

In any case, the omission of the two simple words "voter" and "verified" is essentially what started it all. This is what allows DREs to print results reports with whatever totals the machines come up with, with no independent way to verify them. Before that, our biggest worries were voter suppression and hanging chads.

Now imagine if this was not only done deliberately to facilitate fraud, but also to get the Dems to stop believing in the process, to give up on voting, and to give up on the party for letting it happen. It's the ultimate form of voter suppression. So under no circumstances should we NOT VOTE! It's just those contributions that may have to be selectively withheld.

It does seem that there are at least some Dems in DC who were duped, rather than complicit in this. The others like McCormack and Cox from GA, are just taking advantage of the situation, as the Repukes are.

I agree we have to think locally now and some progress is being made.

The broom idea sounds good too!

I don't buy it any more. That blank stare we're getting from people WHOSE JOB IT IS TO GET VOTES is not ignorance; it is collusion and corruption.

Look, I found out about Black Box Voting the way many others found out about it--from the BBV web site, and the stuff that was happening in California (Kevin Shelley's challenge of Diebold--suing them, decertifying their machines) about six months before the election. I'm just an ordinary citizen and voter, who volunteers for various citizen campaigns. But I at least knew of the potential for election theft via electronics, and, when it happened, was not totally surprised by it, and then of course found out much more (like, who owns and controls these voting systems).

Now imagine that you are a leader of the Democratic Party planning for a presidential election in 2004. You know that the Bushites stole the 2000 election, and that Congress responded with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which poured $4+ billion into the states to purchase new voting systems with very little control on what was purchased and how it worked. You know that Tom Delay blocked a paper trail mandate from Congress, that HAVA failed to include it, and that electronic voting companies were lavishly lobbying state election officials who were now fat with $4+ billion to stuff into the pockets of these companies for new electronic voting systems--a new and heady power, elections as a big business deal (--they had always been rather low tech and involved lots of volunteers).

You likely have friends who are state/local election officials. You may have gone on one of these lavish lobbying junkets put on by the electronic voting companies yourself. You know what's in these contracts, because it's your JOB to know--"trade secret," proprietary software for the counting of the votes. You also know that the head of Diebold is Wally O'Dell, Bush-Cheney campaign chair in Ohio! --and you soon find out about his memo to Bush. You're also aware of the rightwing connections of ES&S. You may even be aware that the former CA Republican Secretary of State now works for Sequoia voting systems (after purchasing those systems for the state). And, as the 2004 election approaches, you are most certainly aware of the new CA DEMOCRATIC Secretary of State's opinion of Diebold--it is making waves across the country.

And you sit on your hands? And you say nothing? --let alone scream bloody murder about what's coming (which is what you should have been doing)?

I repeat. I am an ordinary citizen, not a party leader, and *I* knew a few things about the potential for electronic vote theft prior to the election. I thought my party was onto it--because Kevin Shelley was onto it, here in California--a big Dem state--and because the Dem party said such reassuring things, like "every vote will be counted" THIS TIME.

But you're a PARTY LEADER, planning a presidential election after the previous one was stolen, and you DON'T KNOW what the potential for electronic theft is, and you DON'T WARN people about it, and DO SOMETHING about it?

I don't buy it. And I particularly don't buy it after seeing the state leaders of my party HELP the Bush Cartel and Connie McCormack GET RID OF KEVIN SHELLEY--and permit Arnold Schwarzenegger to APPOINT a Secretary of State who is Diebold-friendly, and who purged his office of the best public servants we have ever had, and replaced them with electronic voting company shills.

If this was a twisted, diabolical, Rovian plot to get DEMOCRATS to lose confidence in voting, he had a hell of a lot of help from the Democratic Party leadership in perpetrating it.

And I'll tell you something, that's the feeling I had in the weeks after the election--that the Democratic Party leaders DIDN'T WANT a strong, active grass roots giving them a 60/40 edge in new voter registration (!), and DIDN'T WANT such a movement turning out the biggest vote in history. They themselves wanted to kill that grass roots movement--the one that backed Dean and compromised on Kerry, and was strongly anti-war.

I don't know for sure if this is true, but that's sure the feeling I got--that they could care less if the election was stolen, and actually preferred that the tremendous victory of the grass roots in this election was wiped out--destroyed, bombed, reversed and obliterated from memory.

Corruption. Specific to electronic voting systems (bribes, lobbying junkets, "revolving door" employment, the new power of doling out $4+ billion--elections as big business--and also the allure of the "elite," "expert," "professional" power over peon voters, in the gobble-de-gook of electronic voting)--not to mention the corruption that may be involved in OTHER government contracts that these same Bushite electronic firms are getting.

Corruption. Military-corporate complex. Many Dems with their hands in that one.

The Democratic Party has become increasingly Republican over the last two decades, as we know. And the majority of the people in the country--the workers, the poor and the middle class--have become less and less represented in government. This situation--of a fascist Bushite coup--looks like a set-up for the Democratic Party to move even further to the right, to represent the majority even less than it does now, and to return to power as a wholly owned subsidiary of global corporations.

They can now tout their PROTECTION of Social Security--as if that should ever have been in question--as a courageous fight on behalf of the majority, rather than achieving universal health care, which is what they should be doing. They can now tout their BETTER MANAGEMENT of the war in Iraq--a war that should never have occurred--as an accomplishment, rather than indicting the Bush war criminals, challenging and reducing military budgets, and aiming at peacefulness, truthfulness and justice.

It's all set up--for the Democrats to be better managers of the bread lines, and for the Democrats to STOP the revolution that should be occurring in this country to cast off the Corporate Powers.

I DON'T think this corruption and collusion is universal throughout the Democratic Party. I think there are some good people among our party leaders, but they are outnumbered, and have an uphill battle to democratize the party (and the country!), just as we do. That's why I have not yet given up my 40 year loyal membership in this party. I also fear a fracturing of the left/center, as occurred in Germany in 1933-34.

But I think we have to look at this situation with open eyes. Yes, the Bush Cartel stole election #2 (#3, actually), mostly by electronic means. And there are Rovian plots in abundance--with plenty of twists and turns in them. But if people stop voting for Democrats, we have only the Democratic leadership to blame, because THEY have done as much to destroy the integrity of our elections as any Bushite has done.

The culprits: Democratic election officials who have sold out to Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and others. Elected Democrats who are beholden to such election officials, or have themselves sold out. The party leaders who failed to cry foul on this election SYSTEM--and on its fraudulent result. The party leaders and Kerry-Edwards campaign advisers who failed to protect the rights of black citizens, students and the poor in Ohio, Florida and other places, and failed to warn voters, and to show any vigilance whatsoever, on electronic election theft.

They let Wally O'Dell & brethren count all our votes in secret. Think about it.

One can only conclude that they DIDN'T WANT to be beholden to the poor and to the antiwar majority in this country. There doesn't seem to be any other reasonable explanation for their behavior. And the DNC report on Ohio from the old guard only confirms this suspicion. It is a cover up, if I ever saw one. (Dean is trying to use it to expose the fraud, and to get something going on election reform--but the report is an albatross, designed to weigh him down and prevent such efforts.)

I understand that the powers at DU have removed the 2004 election forum from the main page--as of today, or last night--a shocking and outrageous suppression of election fraud and election reform information, investigation and activism. It's enough to make one despair!