I'm here to pronounce that I don't give a rat's ass about counting

the votes to make sure the right person got the votes to change things for the next election. I say the right person got the votes this time and counting the votes, voter fraud, and whatever else was involved, it is now to put the largest vote getter in office. Enough of this counting the votes will not change the outcome, why the hell count if the outcome is not going to change? I hope this is just rhetoric spoken to get past the rw and media killing the effort before it got off the ground. Happy Thanksgiving! and I'm off to eat with the family and no politics allowed there today.

cats as I have disowned the crazy repug family! Happy Turkey Day!

I think they slept through civics in highschool.

Have a nice yummy meal, and pray for the homeless and jobless, the new growth sector of the Amerikan ekonomy.

hidden profile...

hmmm.

The leader of this effort needs to be Kerry. No one else has enough credibility to make a bit of difference. Until Kerry makes a compelling case, nothing will change. I do not understand how Kerry can care so little about this effort. Press reports have him with several million dollars left in his budget (someplace between 15-40 million by press accounts) but he is still raising money to pay for the vote counting effort (and it really doesn't appear as if he is doing much if anything).

If Kerry believes that there were significant enough electoral problems to change the outcome, he should make a case to the American public. If Kerry cannot find such evidence, he needs to announce this so that people can put this election behind them and start working on the next. Leaving this issue leaderless is unfair to the many people who supported him with both time and money during the election. There are people on this site who are not eating with their family on Thanksgiving because of the outcome of the election, but it seems that to Kerry it is business as usual. There is something wrong with this picture.

he is a bigger dumb ass than I thought.

It is not a question of thinking there is a problem.

WE KNOW THERE ARE PROBLEMS.

It is NOT a question of PROOF.

If you think that there will be "PROOF" that will sway public opinion you are out of touch with the reality of America today.

NO PROOF WILL CHANGE ANYTHING.

WE WILL NOT WIN UNTIL WE FIGHT EACH AND EVERY VOTER PROBLEM.

We must attack with all reasources NON-STOP. Every time anyone from the left gets air time the message must be the same. Without complete unity we have no chance.

It always looks like the one who calls foul when it only benefits himself has nothing to stand on.
Let the third parties come up with something solid and Kerry will step in.

Nice sentiment, but the only thing the radical fringe will repeat of your post is "(Kerry) is a bigger dumb ass than I thought."

There's nothing as satisfying as handing over extra ammunition to the enemy in a fit of pique, is there?

Happy Thanksgiving.

What's wrong with this picture.

That's like saying first time voters don't count

n/t

... to make my first post! }(

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Uh we are trying to preseve, you know uh, Democracy.
What the fuck are you doing here?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Kerry ran a totally half-hearted campaign that never stood a chance of turning public opinion universally against Bush, as it should be. This is one example of simulated competition. Another example: debates where only two narrowly different points of view are heard. Another: gerrymandered Congressional districts where only a handful of seats are considered "competitive" rather than "safe."

These examples begin to sketch out the perimeter of the myth of democracy in America. We will not find voices to lead in ending this by looking to anyone involved with preserving and perpetuating this and other myths. That includes Kerry, Bush, NYTimes, Fox - even partisanship, through its false frames, often reflects simulated competition.

The very notion that we just had an election survives because millions of people choose not to distinguish between the appearance of a genuine contest and a reality that closely enough resembles such. We have no BASIS for confidence in the legitimacy of US elections. This is the unified message that We The People must adopt. This is how you stand up to a bully.

Read more about the No Confidence Movement.

If elections were held under reasonable conditions, ones which gave us a BASIS for confidence in their legitimacy, then of course counting matters. I'm saying re-counting the 2004 US presidential election shouldn't be where we hang our hats. On the one hand, it is good that such moves are keeping the whole thing at least a little bit unresolved. But in the bigger picture, like pat_k argues in this thread:

"There is ample reason to suspect that the current "baseline" results have been corrupted. Whether the addition or subtraction of votes from an untrustworthy initial total will "change the outcome" is irrelevant. The issue is that the initial total is in doubt."

I agree with pat_k on this point though we draw different conclusions from it. I think this means that even if a re-count in every state led to a clear change in outcome, a loud and vocal group would still cry foul. It just wouldn't be our group anymore. I'm not down with that. There is no BASIS for confidence in the legitimacy of the results reported now, and/or after a series of re-counts. Hence, the counting does not matter.

My even bigger, bigger point is that a Kerry win was never in the interest of the greater good. He campaigned and voted for the war, the patriot act, consolidated media, 9/11 whitewash committee, etc. These are some of the examples I point out to portray both Kerry and the Dem party as false alternatives. carl_pwccaman asked me in this thread:

"As for Kerry and the Democratic party being false alternatives....

Doesn't that depend on what you are seeking an alternative from, as your primary concern?"

I will cross-post this reply...that no, it does not depend. These false alternatives exist against the static determination of whether democracy in America is reality or myth. Both parties openly work very hard to preserve and perpetuate the two-party system. The two-party system stifles competition of ideas and defiles the premise of democracy. For Kerry and the Dems as a whole to NOT be false alternatives, they would have to succeed at ending the two-party system, the war, the 9/11 cover-up, and corporate control of media, government, and election administration (just for starters). Kerry and the Dems do not even consider these changes among their goals.

We are no longer in the era of Anybody But Bush. That was always a snake oil medicine pitch anyway. We're now in the era of fascism and our big picture goal has to be peaceful revolution. Smaller, more immediate steps must first emerge, of course, in order for such talk to mean anything. And this is why I encourage you all to get involved with the No Confidence Movement.

It seems to me that's what you are saying. Maybe you could clarify yourself.

And it doesn't matter if votes count or not. Or at least that's what it seems like you are saying. Please clarify

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

for the welcome...I feel among friends,
marions ghost