Too few voting machines IS voter fraud

If the number of voting machines in any precint is grossly lower than the normal (based on number of registered voters or turnout in 2000), this IS voter fraud.

Who made these decisions? This must be documented.

If ONE voter comes forward to say they couldn't wait in line to vote, then Ohio needs to hold a new election.

Except this time, paper ballots, sequentially numbered by precinct, hand counted.

Election day.

required, and this was grossly ignored in Dem. leaning precincts.

other countries manage it perfectly well.

If this is the case, and there is already sworn testimony from disenfranchised voters, why aren't they petitioning for a new election now?

petitioning for a new election.

of the law."

It is unconstitutional for white neighborhoods to have enough voting machines while in black neighborhoods people have to wait for hours to vote.

and it just shows you the level to which things are distorted that I'm pretty sure if a judge ruled that way he'd be condemned by the right wing for being an activist judge- and what's more people wold believe them, the media would say , Democrats claim he is only exercising voters' basic constitutional rights and the Republicans would claim he was making them up out of thin air and what right does he have to force this down the poor innocent elections boards' throats, who's right who's wrong, you decide

I don't remember the details, but the repubs used "equal protection" in their legal fight against the Florida recounts.

I was thinking about this issue, how many voters did not have equal protection in regards to voting, which is similar to what the repubs were claiming about the Florida recounts.

Consider two persons in different areas, they both must get to work and they can only vote in the morning. One person is in one area where the line is long, and this person either stands in line until having to give up and go to work, or doesn't even bother because they can tell they won't get to work in time.
The other person, because the line is short, can vote and get to work on time.

That is not equal protection.

Could someone sue over this issue?

The Board of Elections in each county decided how to deploy the machines.

"The day began with an unexpected appearance by four poll workers from three precincts who asked to speak with Wright's team. They said they had not received the support they needed from Page and in particular, that they needed more voting machines.

After talking with Page, Wright said it seemed clear that she had kept some voting machines at the elections office despite long lines at polling places. Page acknowledged doing so, but once again said she could not explain the decision."


http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/10259601.htm

We the People, through our representatives, have defined our election laws to ensure that election results reflect OUR will. If, in any state, there is a reasonable doubt that the election results reflect the will of the voters -- and the people who left lines, unable to wait are voters -- and application of the law fails to provide a remedy that eliminates the doubt, then We the People must demand a political remedy; one that trumps all legalisms and cynical misuse of our courts. We must demand that our Congress reject the electors from ANY STATE that fails to validate its results through comprehensive, apolitical investigation and audit.

The law is intended to serve our will, not thwart it. We can never again allow a "technical" or "legal" argument trump reality as we did in 2000.


We are the governed. We do not consent.

See these talking points

this from the moment he had the dem nomination. he only had to concentrate on 3 states. they should have had people registered, informed them where their preceint is located. hell they should have had trial votes. you how buy time on the local radio station, hot dogs, cake, ballons, local musical talent, and some voting machine to do trial voting so people would know how the machine worked, and what type of fraud to look for.

kerry had 300 million dollars, it's bullshit that any fraud was allowed to happen.

And very strict Absentee rules.

Nor could he assure that there would be enough voting machines on election day.

In retrospect I believe the campignes should file suit to have the BOE of each county disclose their machine deployment plans and guarentee a machine/voter ratio of 1/200 Working machines or face a year in jail.

Actually, just get rid of the machines all together.

machines, but they could have found out how many machines they were planning to put out for each polling place. and raised holy hell if the machine's didn't add up.

he had the money to do mass calling to people who we knew were voting absentee and made sure that they had what they needed. they could have bought out the radio time in those areas well before nov., and remind everybody what the deal was going to be like. kerry's crew screwed up on this, there should not have been any 4 hour waits.

I agree.

Oh, I know who you think... but HOW did they do it?

Who decides how many machines to put in each precinct?

The reason I ask is that in every precinct I've worked in it was decided by the county (the body that purchases the machines and determines the numbers). How did Republicans control that process in Cuyahoga county?

O8) If they re-vote in any given state, isn't that like playing the lotto after you know the winning numbers? How is it disenfranchisement when they left the polls open later to give everyone a chance to vote? (Just asking a question).

how many people went home without voting? Is it reasonable to expect people to wait in line until 1am when people in wealthy counties only had to wait 5 min?

And many couldn't wait. People had jobs to go to, children to care for. Some people waited 8 hours or more, what do you call that?

Did you hear about the elderly woman who waited on line for 4 hours, and when she returned home, she found her husband dead? If she was able to vote in a reasonable amount of time, she might have come home and been able to save him.

This was Ohio.

Meanwhile, no one is screaming about Florida. I have a friend who worked as a poll watcher in Pinellas County. People, many of them elderly, stood in line for 3 hours in the sweltering heat. Many of those, when reaching the polling place were told they were at the wrong one (lots of confusion with changes of polling places), and then had to go to the another, waiting on line for 3 hours again. Interestingly enough, my friend who worked the polls there said that 8-9 out of 10 were for Kerry. How did she know? The Kerry people were distributing water bottles, fans and tshirts with Kerry/Edwards on them. A vast majority came in wearing the tshirts. Kerry "lost" Pinellas.

Randi Rhodes of AAR who was voting in West Palm Beach had a similar story about the lines, and confusion over polling places. Elderly people for the most part being put through the hoops.

Here in NY it took me all of 10 minutes to vote, and in the 35 years that I've voted, I believe my longest wait was a half hour.

Politics - November 2004

UPDATED: Complete Audio Coverage of Testimony on Ohio Voter Disenfranchisement and Voter Fraud
Nonpartisan Hearings Investigating Voting Irregularities and Suppression, Nov. 13 in Columbus, OH
by Eliza Jane Schneider, with text intro by Independent Eye Staff
rating: 5.0000 votes: 16
Snip.....................

Note: All audio from the hearings is now active

Exclusive audio coverage of sworn, public testimonials of irregularities and voter suppression in Ohio from the non-partisan hearings Nov. 13 at the New Faith Baptist Church in Columbus Ohio.

1pm-1:30pm
http://www.indynet.org/voices/Nov13_1_30.mp3

1:30pm-2:15pm
http://www.indynet.org/voices/Nov13_29_87.mp3

2:15pm-3:30
http://www.indynet.org/voices/Nov13_87_147.mp3

3:30pm-5:30
http://www.indynet.org/voices/Nov13_147_end.mp3

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Thank you. I've been lurking for about 2 months. I don't agree with everything said and like to form my own opinions. But we're all Americans just the same. I'm a radical thinker.

isn't it obvious many people did not get a chance to vote? I am pretty sad this has to be explained to people.
:argh:

It suppresses what WOULD be the vote. IMO about now, it ought to be punishable by death (okay, I'm exaggerating, but only slightly), but it's NOT "vote fraud" nor even "voteR fraud."

The better term is either "VOTE fraud" or "Election Fraud" because it's not the VOTERS doing it.

RICO, sections 9-110.310 and 9-110.330 are very interesting in this regard.

fraud - intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right b : an act of deceiving or misrepresenting

suppression sounds like you are selling deodorant

fraud is the frame and the frame fits

I disagree here's why...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=election+fraud&r=67

election fraud

n : misrepresentation or alteration of the true results of an election



I agree that voter disenfranchisement is the correct term along with vote suppression.

However, those people that took part in those activities were in fact committing a form of Election Fraud.

and widespread. Anyone see the brief news blurb on election night about the voting machines that broke down in Harlem? A woman was interviewed who said the lever would only go to "B*sh." Coincidence?
Give me a break.

And the long lines were disgraceful. Voting isn't supposed to be akin to waiting for rock concert tickets. How many voters got disgusted and left? Thousands? How many of those people were voting anti-B*sh?

I posted these thoughts about a week ago - and take the liberty of reposting them now. It seems timely.
---------------
There was fraud - the F word - without any doubt, but just because we say there was, there is no reason for Joe/Jane Public to believe us. We need to present our evidence using terminology that people will readily understand, and for which they don't already have some other connotation.

For example, I see a lot of headlines and discussions referring to "Voter Fraud" and would argue that this phrase presents a picture of masses of individuals doing 'stuff' to jimmy-up the results. Remember that 'We the People' are the voters, and that 'Voter Fraud' can easily imply that voters committed the fraud. Perhaps if we stick to VOTE FRAUD or ELECTION FRAUD we may paint a clearer picture.

Another example is the use of the word "hacked". A lot of folks draw their understanding of this term from movies such as 'War Games', where a bright kid uses a phone or network connection to gain access to something that should have been better protected. Now, while that certainly IS possible, we run the risk of immediate blowback from vendors and election officials saying that their machines are NOT connected to the internet, nor to telephone lines, and regardless of whether or not it's true, it gives them an immediate opportunity to cast doubt upon our entire message.

This election was manipulated or
The election results were tampered with.
The election results were illegally influenced.
The election process was tampered with.

One man's opinion - your mileage may vary....
HG

"I think the definition of truth is the willingness of the regime to allow for verification"

This is an excellent point. Clear, obvious, easy to understand, easy to explain...and patently unconstitutional.

Perhaps that's why we're being treated to so many threads about the Yo-Yo-dyne/Illuminati/Black Helicopter connection and other red herrings. Otherwise we might see the obvious.

Who needs orbiting battle stations with genetically engineered Vulcan hacker brains-in-brine, when you can just keep a bunch of people from voting, throw out the votes of others, miscount the votes of a few more, and destroy the records afterward?

--MarkusQ

they had a large number of machines. I don't know if that was just for early voting, but we still had long lines here too. I would hate to have seen what it was like with 2 machines. It was around 1 hour to 2 hour wait when I went.

I had to wait in line at lunch about 15 minutes.
This is an an area that votes 60%+ for Bush. Just an FYI.

In an Ohio precinct that had 1300 registered voters, only 2 vote machines were provided- old punch card systems. They average 10 voters per hour. Thus 2 machines could handle about 240 voters if things went well. So what happened to the other voters.
The headlines read long waiting lines in Cleveland precincts.
But results showed very low vote turnout of voters. In other words in precincts like this, most weren't allowed to vote.

See votersunited.com web page and
documentation by Dr. Phillips on another thread