New York Times story on vote fraud

"Some from the traditional media have called for an explanation," he said, "but no one from these blogs has called and said, 'We want to know what really happened.' "

Also, in my read, he totally ignores the lack of errors which helped Kerry. Were there any? It is fine to say 'hey there were errors, this is an election and that happens' but WHERE are the Kerry favoring errors?

with a pro-con comparison, I always begin thinking.....


Why is it acceptable to have massive voter count glitches? Why is no one writing with outrage? The right to vote and for that vote to be counted is sacred! I don't think folks would like the banks to mess with our checking and savings accounts with glitches, or our paychecks! There is no diffrence....In my opinion.

who ever they didn't! I read the NY Times piece and rather than sulk-about feeling cheated, maybe our party leaders should put their energies into winning ideas, winning messages and winning, period!

What about this small blurb in the NY Times on 11-9-04:

YONKERS: SENATE RACE NARROWS IN RECOUNT The race between Senator Nicholas A. Spano, who is Republican, and his Democratic challenger, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, narrowed to fewer than 200 votes yesterday, the Democratic Party reported, as election officials began the recount of ballots cast on voting machines in the 35th Senate District. Jonathan Rosen, campaign director for the New York Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, said Ms. Stewart-Cousins picked up about 1,400 votes in the recount of machines from 6 of 12 wards. The machine recount was expected to continue through tomorrow. Anthony J. Mangone, counsel to Mr. Spano, said he could not confirm the Democrats' tally, but said the day's recount "did cut down the lead considerably." Carolee C. Sunderland, the Republican chairwoman of the county's Board of Elections, said she would not discuss tallies until the recount was complete.Kirk Semple (NYT)

I don't know, isn't this looking like something called "evidence"?

We all know the exit poll, Dixiecrat, anecdotal "I voted Kerry-came up Bush" arguments can be pushed aside by the otherside, and won't get us moving forward. What we need is actual evidence like the NY recount or a whislteblower to come forward with evidence. This will then snowball into more recounts, especially in the districts that have optical scan machines. Recounts are the key, so hopefully they will begin soon in Ohio and other states.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

The e-mail messages and Web postings had all the twitchy cloak-and-dagger thrust of a Hollywood blockbuster. "Evidence mounts that the vote may have been hacked," trumpeted a headline on the Web site CommonDreams.org. "Fraud took place in the 2004 election through electronic voting machines," declared BlackBoxVoting.org.

In the space of seven days, an online market of dark ideas surrounding last week's presidential election took root and multiplied.

But while the widely read universe of Web logs was often blamed for the swift propagation of faulty analyses, the blogosphere, as it has come to be known, spread the rumors so fast that experts were soon able to debunk them, rather than allowing them to linger and feed conspiracy theories. Within days of the first rumors of a stolen election, in fact, the most popular theories were being proved wrong - though many were still reluctant to let them go.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12theory.html?hp&ex=1100322000&en=bef1453564cd6e4e&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Spin control. Blow off the provable as anomalies, debunk the rest. Lots of spin going on.

Interesting, isn't it? Given that most of what he said about 1970s typewriters was incorrect .

to go to hell.

"... <in Columbus, Ohio> an electronic voting machine malfunctioned in one precinct and allotted some 4,000 votes to President Bush, kicking off its own flurry of Web speculation. That particular problem was unusual and remains unexplained, but it was caught and corrected, Mr. Damschroder said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/12/politics/12theory.html?ei=5094&en=bef1453564cd6e4e&hp=&ex=1100322000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&position=

God forbid there are other problems not caught and left uncorrected.

No one ever proved that those documents were false, but they got Rather to apologize and everyone accepts that the bogus story (started by blogs fed by RNC) as fact.

"And the early Election Day polls, conducted for a consortium of television networks and The Associated Press, which proved largely inaccurate in showing Mr. Kerry leading in Florida and Ohio, continued to be offered as evidence that the Bush team somehow cheated."

HUH? He says the exit polls are inaccurate because they showed Kerry leading in Florida and Ohio. But that's the whole point! The idiot author is saying the exit polls are not useful as evidence the count is wrong because...they don't agree with the count. (If they agreed with the count, I suppose it would be o.k. to use it.)

He also cites the crap non-study by MIT/CalTech. See this DU thread on it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=43258&mesg_id=43258&page=

and my comments on it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=43258&mesg_id=43697

All this from the newspaper who for two years refused to acknowledge Greg Palast's investigation of the Florida 2000 felon list that cost Gore thousands of votes.